Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
Author Message
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,674
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 353
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #41
RE: Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
(01-25-2018 12:23 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-25-2018 11:50 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(01-23-2018 09:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-20-2018 08:53 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-20-2018 08:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Stop right there: If you are counting Army - Navy as an "AAC game", well it's obviously not that so go back and recalibrate. Army-Navy is it's own thing, even has its own TV deal. Heck I bet 85% of everyone who tunes in has no idea what, if any, conferences they are members of.

If you were referring to some other AAC game that drew 8.4+ million fans and i've forgotten it, then i apologize. 07-coffee3

Also, about bowl games being watched vs regular season games: You say that in 2016 about six AAC teams had regular season games that topped their bowl game viewership. But, again, are those legit AAC games or piggybacks on big-name P5?

E.g., if USF's bowl game drew more viewers than all their AAC games, but less than USF vs FSU, and likewise if the one game Temple had that drew more was Temple vs Penn State, well obviously those ratings are due to the blue-chip P5 opponent, they aren't "AAC games" in any meaningful sense.

But again, if you are actually referencing real AAC games, like Temple vs UConn beating their bowl game, then again I apologize.

1. Actually READ my post and then respond to it. I go into how many of the better-than-bowl-rated games are conference controlled for '15 and '17. I acknowledge that Temple at Penn State is one thing and PennState at Temple is another and Temple in two AAC ccgs or UCF@Temple is yet another.

2. My having done that goes above and beyond what you and arkstfan were saying. You were talking about exposure and viewership. UCF's paycheck game at Michigan is still exposure. The perpetual ND series is good for Navy football recruiting and the Army-Navy game is a great commercial for the institution, period.
A. You started with "nice exposure for the G5" and I'm saying AWESOME for the "G4" but only good-not-great for the AAC
B. arkstfan said "Best TV ratings of the year for their bowl game," and that's where it doesn't matter that Army Navy doesn't get AAC any dollars. Or if you throw that out I got Navy ND and if you throw that out I STILL have Navy Houston or the AAC championship game. And it's not just Navy - I gave examples for SEVEN AAC schools.
C. You then doubled down on being wrong saying "double or even triple it's best audience for the year" and that is not true for any AAC bowl team. G4s maybe. But not my conference
You started talking about exposure and viewership, not whether the AAC team has inherent appeal or whether a certain rating will benefit in TV negotiations. To come back and split hairs that a game was or wasn't a "legit AAC game" is moving the goalposts.

3. Regarding 2016 since you asked. The only "piggyback" game of the six was UCF@ Michigan. Navy was the Army and ND games. Houston was Oklahoma at Houston. USF was their home game vs FSU - so AAC inventory in addition to being straight up exposure. Temple was the AAC championship and Memphis was Houston-Memphis on ABC on Black Friday.
Details for all three years, for AAC and G4s here:
http://csnbbs.com/thread-838636-post-150...id15000866

But mostly - actually read before replying.

That looks like an awful lot of verbiage to cop to what i asked - namely that the games you were referencing were either Army - Navy or games vs big-name P5, like Oklahoma, FSU, and Michigan, games which I explained shouldn't count -with the exception of Temple's AAC title game and Houston vs Memphis.

As for "actual reading", first, remember that this is a football forum. It's not anyone's job. Nobody is required to "read" your posts for every nitzy, pedantic, detail you put in them, such that when we overlook them you can shout "READ what i said"! When you start paying me to read your posts, then I'll be obligated to pay that kind of attention to their details, thanks.

Second, recall that in my prior post, I didn't single out the AAC. I said "Typically, a G5 team will double or even triple its best audience of the year ...".

Since typically means "in most cases", there was no reason for you to reply with AAC - specific examples, when I was talking about the G5 generally, the entire G5, and "typically" obviously leaves room for exceptions. Any and all AAC, or other G5 conference exceptions, were implied by my statement.

The only valid ground to contest what i said would be to look at the entirety of the G5, and if it is true that for entire population of G5, it is NOT typically the case that the bowl game doubles or triples their best regular audience, then I would stand corrected. But you didn't do that, you invoked just the AAC.

Once you did, taking the discussion out of the realm i was talking about, then it was entirely fair for me to dissect that claim by addressing whether the AAC teams were responsible for that exposure -that's not moving the goal post, it's just taking the analysis to a more detailed level, which is where you apparently wanted it to go when you took my "G5" comment and made it about the AAC.

So no, I am correct to note that it is misleading to mention Army-Navy, UCF - Michigan, etc. and compare them to bowl games. You were misleading and wrong to do so, so i properly rebuked you for that.

For some reason, you are a Navy fan with real loyalty to the AAC, weird, the only one i know of. So you bristled at that G5 statement, and hastened to reply that it isn't true of the AAC and you tied yourself in knots doing so. Too bad. 07-coffee3

I was going to jump into this one but this caught my attention “For some reason, you are a Navy fan with a real loyalty to the AAC, weird, the only one I know of.” That’s exactly what I’ve always thought too. Never met any Navy fans like that either....but I have read a lot of AAC fans who write like that on this board every day.

I don't know why you would find it weird. Pretty straightforward.

Big East was after Navy for YEARS before we said yes. Annual talks. Pretty much a standing invitation.

When Navy took the decision to forego 130+ years of independence in 2011-2012, it wasn't for a couple bucks here or a couple bucks there.
We had our own contract with CBSSN, and we were a tentpole property for them. We had Army-Navy. We had Navy-NotreDame. We had bowl deals out to 2016 (our first two bowls in the AAC were honoring pre-existing agreements). Continuing those bowl deals and scheduling as an independent were getting harder, but weren't yet impossible. So why join a conference that was alternately depicted as impossible for us to compete in or dying on the vine?

Navy finally said yes to the Big East with the strategic goal of being on the right side of the next tectonic shift in the college football landscape in 2024-2025. Hmmm, what else has that strategic goal?
Navy's reason for being an AAC member today is about 100% overlap with the reason for the AAC P6 campaign.

You say "loyalty," if you asked me I'd use words along the lines of "committed to the strategic goal."

I agreed for Quo for once when said he’s never met a Navy who thinks along these AAC lines. Navy could have been in the ACC or Big East....Never shown an interest.
Most of the Navy fans I know care about only 2 or 3 (Army, ND, AF) games and don’t even know what the AAC is.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2018 02:57 PM by billybobby777.)
01-25-2018 02:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,838
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 633
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #42
RE: Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
(01-25-2018 11:50 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I was going to jump into this one but this caught my attention “For some reason, you are a Navy fan with a real loyalty to the AAC, weird, the only one I know of.” That’s exactly what I’ve always thought too. Never met any Navy fans like that either....but I have read a lot of AAC fans who write like that on this board every day.

Yes, I grew up in Maryland about 15 miles from Annapolis and know some Navy men. The ones I know care about (in order), Army, Notre Dame, Air Force, with Notre Dame being pretty darn close to Army. Those are the games that stand out to them.

Since Navy joined the AAC, I've tried to invoke our conference-mates status, bring up Navy and USF in terms of the conference race, and that's just never drawn interest.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2018 03:57 PM by quo vadis.)
01-25-2018 03:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,954
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
Obviously, I'm not going to gainsay whom you've met or what their views are.

I will say that I frequent the only Navy sports message board worth reading (it's behind pay wall on one of the recruiting-centric sites) and my position on this is pretty standard there. I'm actually less active a poster there because I generally find myself nodding, saying "yup," and moving on.

A couple counterpoints to that - the population on a sports message board, especially a pay one, is not casual or average fans, so I've probably given the AAC and P6 more attention and thought than many who still legitimately identify as Navy fans.
And pro P6 has been an evolution. Leery about giving up independence going back to the late '11 indications that this was actually happening, but all the developments since support that it was the right call. I already somewhat miss the schedule variety of independence, too.
And of course, no AAC game will ever overtake Army. Ever. That's for football and 22 other "Star Games/Matches" each year. And AF for the Commander in Chief's Trophy will always be 1a (Even if plenty have more dislike for the Falcons). Notre Dame is number 2 in History, number 2 in $value, and number 1 in recruiting value for the coaches...winning it will always be important but since '07 losing it has been tolerable. Focusing on those three to the exclusion of AAC is not unreasonable for Navy fans.

Counter-counter-points... I've been to every NMCMS game but UCF since getting back in country for the '15 season. Hard to judge between the energy and excitement of the mids storming the field for Houston win vs for Air Force win. CCG was a disappointing result but an historical occasion. Being in the national conversation for the 15 Peach Bowl on Black Friday and for the 16 Cotton Bowl after Thanksgiving was pretty important.
01-25-2018 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,674
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 353
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #44
RE: Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
(01-25-2018 09:04 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Obviously, I'm not going to gainsay whom you've met or what their views are.

I will say that I frequent the only Navy sports message board worth reading (it's behind pay wall on one of the recruiting-centric sites) and my position on this is pretty standard there. I'm actually less active a poster there because I generally find myself nodding, saying "yup," and moving on.

A couple counterpoints to that - the population on a sports message board, especially a pay one, is not casual or average fans, so I've probably given the AAC and P6 more attention and thought than many who still legitimately identify as Navy fans.
And pro P6 has been an evolution. Leery about giving up independence going back to the late '11 indications that this was actually happening, but all the developments since support that it was the right call. I already somewhat miss the schedule variety of independence, too.
And of course, no AAC game will ever overtake Army. Ever. That's for football and 22 other "Star Games/Matches" each year. And AF for the Commander in Chief's Trophy will always be 1a (Even if plenty have more dislike for the Falcons). Notre Dame is number 2 in History, number 2 in $value, and number 1 in recruiting value for the coaches...winning it will always be important but since '07 losing it has been tolerable. Focusing on those three to the exclusion of AAC is not unreasonable for Navy fans.

Counter-counter-points... I've been to every NMCMS game but UCF since getting back in country for the '15 season. Hard to judge between the energy and excitement of the mids storming the field for Houston win vs for Air Force win. CCG was a disappointing result but an historical occasion. Being in the national conversation for the 15 Peach Bowl on Black Friday and for the 16 Cotton Bowl after Thanksgiving was pretty important.

I’m glad you are enthusiastic about the AAC and P6 when I actually think Navy could get an all sports invite to the ACC or Big 12 today.
Another note, Navy has had some good wrestlers over the year. There used to a lone star wrestling tournament in Texas with Navy giving Oklahoma wrestlers some battles....it’s been about 10 years since I’ve been to one of those events....Been to Navy vs NCSU and Navy vs Oklahoma....yeah I’m a college wrestling fanatic.
01-25-2018 09:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,954
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
(01-25-2018 09:50 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(01-25-2018 09:04 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Obviously, I'm not going to gainsay whom you've met or what their views are.

I will say that I frequent the only Navy sports message board worth reading (it's behind pay wall on one of the recruiting-centric sites) and my position on this is pretty standard there. I'm actually less active a poster there because I generally find myself nodding, saying "yup," and moving on.

A couple counterpoints to that - the population on a sports message board, especially a pay one, is not casual or average fans, so I've probably given the AAC and P6 more attention and thought than many who still legitimately identify as Navy fans.
And pro P6 has been an evolution. Leery about giving up independence going back to the late '11 indications that this was actually happening, but all the developments since support that it was the right call. I already somewhat miss the schedule variety of independence, too.
And of course, no AAC game will ever overtake Army. Ever. That's for football and 22 other "Star Games/Matches" each year. And AF for the Commander in Chief's Trophy will always be 1a (Even if plenty have more dislike for the Falcons). Notre Dame is number 2 in History, number 2 in $value, and number 1 in recruiting value for the coaches...winning it will always be important but since '07 losing it has been tolerable. Focusing on those three to the exclusion of AAC is not unreasonable for Navy fans.

Counter-counter-points... I've been to every NMCMS game but UCF since getting back in country for the '15 season. Hard to judge between the energy and excitement of the mids storming the field for Houston win vs for Air Force win. CCG was a disappointing result but an historical occasion. Being in the national conversation for the 15 Peach Bowl on Black Friday and for the 16 Cotton Bowl after Thanksgiving was pretty important.

I’m glad you are enthusiastic about the AAC and P6 when I actually think Navy could get an all sports invite to the ACC or Big 12 today.
Another note, Navy has had some good wrestlers over the year. There used to a lone star wrestling tournament in Texas with Navy giving Oklahoma wrestlers some battles....it’s been about 10 years since I’ve been to one of those events....Been to Navy vs NCSU and Navy vs Oklahoma....yeah I’m a college wrestling fanatic.
A little up and down this year. Some injuries early, but getting back to full strength. 4th in the Southern Scuffle, FIRST in the All-Academy championships this weekend, whipped Maryland in a duel, but GOT whipped by Lehigh.
One of my plebe year roommates was a wrestler; my wife and I first date was a Navy wrestling match.
01-28-2018 12:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,954
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Pretty interesting article on the Bowl Ratings
(01-23-2018 09:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-20-2018 08:53 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-20-2018 08:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-20-2018 02:05 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-18-2018 11:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, e.g., Boise State's bowl game tripled their viewers for any other game, and they are a pretty high profile brand that plays P5 teams in the regular season.

Typically, a G5 team will double or even triple its best audience for the year in their bowl game, no matter how rink-dink the bowl is, and even if it is G5 vs G5.

These bolded statements aren't really true for the American.

In 2017, bowl games were only 3 of the top 10 best-viewed games for the AAC. The Peach Bowl WASN'T the most viewed AAC game.

Stop right there: If you are counting Army - Navy as an "AAC game", well it's obviously not that so go back and recalibrate. Army-Navy is it's own thing, even has its own TV deal. Heck I bet 85% of everyone who tunes in has no idea what, if any, conferences they are members of.

If you were referring to some other AAC game that drew 8.4+ million fans and i've forgotten it, then i apologize. 07-coffee3

Also, about bowl games being watched vs regular season games: You say that in 2016 about six AAC teams had regular season games that topped their bowl game viewership. But, again, are those legit AAC games or piggybacks on big-name P5?

E.g., if USF's bowl game drew more viewers than all their AAC games, but less than USF vs FSU, and likewise if the one game Temple had that drew more was Temple vs Penn State, well obviously those ratings are due to the blue-chip P5 opponent, they aren't "AAC games" in any meaningful sense.

But again, if you are actually referencing real AAC games, like Temple vs UConn beating their bowl game, then again I apologize.

1. Actually READ my post and then respond to it. I go into how many of the better-than-bowl-rated games are conference controlled for '15 and '17. I acknowledge that Temple at Penn State is one thing and PennState at Temple is another and Temple in two AAC ccgs or UCF@Temple is yet another.

2. My having done that goes above and beyond what you and arkstfan were saying. You were talking about exposure and viewership. UCF's paycheck game at Michigan is still exposure. The perpetual ND series is good for Navy football recruiting and the Army-Navy game is a great commercial for the institution, period.
A. You started with "nice exposure for the G5" and I'm saying AWESOME for the "G4" but only good-not-great for the AAC
B. arkstfan said "Best TV ratings of the year for their bowl game," and that's where it doesn't matter that Army Navy doesn't get AAC any dollars. Or if you throw that out I got Navy ND and if you throw that out I STILL have Navy Houston or the AAC championship game. And it's not just Navy - I gave examples for SEVEN AAC schools.
C. You then doubled down on being wrong saying "double or even triple it's best audience for the year" and that is not true for any AAC bowl team. G4s maybe. But not my conference
You started talking about exposure and viewership, not whether the AAC team has inherent appeal or whether a certain rating will benefit in TV negotiations. To come back and split hairs that a game was or wasn't a "legit AAC game" is moving the goalposts.

3. Regarding 2016 since you asked. The only "piggyback" game of the six was UCF@ Michigan. Navy was the Army and ND games. Houston was Oklahoma at Houston. USF was their home game vs FSU - so AAC inventory in addition to being straight up exposure. Temple was the AAC championship and Memphis was Houston-Memphis on ABC on Black Friday.
Details for all three years, for AAC and G4s here:
http://csnbbs.com/thread-838636-post-150...id15000866

But mostly - actually read before replying.

That looks like an awful lot of verbiage to cop to what i asked - namely that the games you were referencing were either Army - Navy or games vs big-name P5, like Oklahoma, FSU, and Michigan, games which I explained shouldn't count -with the exception of Temple's AAC title game and Houston vs Memphis.

As for "actual reading", first, remember that this is a football forum. It's not anyone's job. Nobody is required to "read" your posts for every nitzy, pedantic, detail you put in them, such that when we overlook them you can shout "READ what i said"! When you start paying me to read your posts, then I'll be obligated to pay that kind of attention to their details, thanks.

Second, recall that in my prior post, I didn't single out the AAC. I said "Typically, a G5 team will double or even triple its best audience of the year ...".

Since typically means "in most cases", there was no reason for you to reply with AAC - specific examples, when I was talking about the G5 generally, the entire G5, and "typically" obviously leaves room for exceptions. Any and all AAC, or other G5 conference exceptions, were implied by my statement.

The only valid ground to contest what i said would be to look at the entirety of the G5, and if it is true that for entire population of G5, it is NOT typically the case that the bowl game doubles or triples their best regular audience, then I would stand corrected. But you didn't do that, you invoked just the AAC.

Once you did, taking the discussion out of the realm i was talking about, then it was entirely fair for me to dissect that claim by addressing whether the AAC teams were responsible for that exposure -that's not moving the goal post, it's just taking the analysis to a more detailed level, which is where you apparently wanted it to go when you took my "G5" comment and made it about the AAC.

So no, I am correct to note that it is misleading to mention Army-Navy, UCF - Michigan, etc. and compare them to bowl games. You were misleading and wrong to do so, so i properly rebuked you for that.

For some reason, you are a Navy fan with real loyalty to the AAC, weird, the only one i know of. So you bristled at that G5 statement, and hastened to reply that it isn't true of the AAC and you tied yourself in knots doing so. Too bad. 07-coffee3

Let me try this again.
The statement "The past several years there have not been many schools who didn't have their best TV ratings of the year for their bowl game," is a pretty sweeping statement. I don't intend to contest its general value. However, I will point out that in the specific case of AAC schools it is not true: in fact, a strong counter point is true: far more AAC teams have other-than-bowl games with higher ratings than their bowl game.
The statement "Typically, a G5 team will double or even triple its best audience for the year in their bowl game" may or may not be true for so-called "G5" overall, but that is atypical for AAC teams.

2015-2017 offers 21 AAC bowl teams in Nielsen rated games. For comparison purposes I looked at 2017 bowl teams from CUSA, MAC, MW, and SunBelt -- 19 rated games, so a similar sample size. I did not look at so-called "P5" bowl teams.

Best TV rating of the year for Bowl game?
AAC - 8 of 21 or 38%. 62% (I'd say "many") do not.
"G4" 17 of 19 or 89.5%, so yes that is true for "many"

Double best audience of the year for Bowl game?
AAC 2 of 21 or 9.5%, so I'd say atypical
"G4" 11 of 19 or 57.9% so typical.
All G5 (in an odd sample, 3 years of one conference and 1 year of other four) that's 13 of 40 or 32.5%, so you'll have to decide what typical is.

Then I looked at intra-conference games. (This is actually a little extreme - if USF has the juice to get a home-and-home with FSU, why not credit them with the rating? conference controlled games are sellable inventory.)
Bowl rating better than best intra-conference game rating?
AAC vs AAC 15 bowls had the better rating, 71%
G4 vs G4 100% of bowls were better than intra-conference ratings.

Bowl rating DOUBLE best intra-conference game?
AAC only 5 of 21, 23.8%, I'd submit not typical
G4, 18 of 19 doubled, 94.7%
All "G5" it's 23 of 40 or 57.5%

Not really surprising: there is a huge gulf between AAC and the other 4, even limited to only intra-conference games.

From 2015-2017, in conference controlled games:
Games over 3 million viewers: AAC 8, G4s 0
Games over 2 million viewers: AAC 14, mwc 1
Games over 1 million viewers: AAC 24, CUSA 1, MAC 2, mwc 3

From 2015-2017
AAC vs AAC games - 4 games over 3 million viewers, with five teams represented. 0 by the other four
AAC vs AAC games - 7 games over 2 million viewers, with seven teams represented. 0 by the other four
AAC vs AAC games - 13 games over 1 million viewers. 2 MAC championships got over 1 million and 1 mwc vs mwc regular season.

Not the SEC, nor am I trying to say that it is. But it IS another example of the separation, on- and off-field between the AAC and the other four.

My bottom line is that things that are typical of CUSA, MAC, MWC, and SunBelt are often NOT typical of the American. "Typical of the 'G5' " is actually hard to find because, as the song used to say, one of these things is not like the others.
(This post was last modified: 01-28-2018 02:06 PM by slhNavy91.)
01-28-2018 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.