Why, sure. Fly yer colors, man.I'm a Michigan fan. Everyone here knows that. I didn't realize I had to post an avy to be part of the club
It is the 2nd largest television market in the country. The B1G just brought on the two teams which are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the market share in LA.
I don't really go crazy with that stuff. It is quite easy to know who my team is when I have conservations.
It adds $20 million a year, that's it. A lot has happened to basic cable since 2014, like they lost half their subscribers. Also, Rutgers was a way bigger deal ... the B1G picked up New Jersey and more importantly the entire state of New York with Rutgers. Markets have zero to do with being blue-blood or not ... just being there is all that counts. Hence, Rutgers.
I thought I responded to that but my memory ain't real swift. My bad if I didn't.
Do you have an avi of a Wolverine bouncing on his head like a pogo stick similar to the one Cornhusker fan that shall go unmentioned uses?I'm a Michigan fan. Everyone here knows that. I didn't realize I had to post an avy to be part of the club
USC played in a great one a few years ago, I think. Yup 2017 v. PSU.
It is a shame it won't happen. It'd be a huge win for the B1G though if it did. As you know more than most -- Nebraska has been a flop in the B1G. Hell -- it'd be a win for the Nebraska -- they'd get to play more teams they have a chance to beat more often and their AD won't complain about their schedule being too tough anymore
Lol I see Michigan fans are pretty cocky now after finally doing something last year. Congrats on finally finishing above 3rd in your division. Too bad you still don’t have a legit championship since wore leather helmets.It is a shame it won't happen. It'd be a huge win for the B1G though if it did. As you know more than most -- Nebraska has been a flop in the B1G. Hell -- it'd be a win for the Nebraska -- they'd get to play more teams they have a chance to beat more often and their AD won't complain about their schedule being too tough anymore
I'm nothing like the homer Michigan fans -- I know the ceiling UM has in today's CFB. Last year was an anomaly, not the norm. UM couldn't recruit like OSU even before we decided to take a backseat with the NIL deals. We couldn't recruit like OSU before our administration decided the only players we can take in the portal are grad transfers with a clean academic slate, because they won't accept credits from other schools. It is only going to get worse unless the administration gets out of the way and goes all in with NIL -- thats our ONLY shot to compete with OSU in recruiting (opening the enormous booster wallet they have access to)
Damn. Ruining all the fun being all sensible and shit. What kind of Michigan fan are you?!
Lets be honest UCLA vs any big 10 team on avg isnt exciting anyone.It adds $20 million a year, that's it. A lot has happened to basic cable since 2014, like they lost half their subscribers. Also, Rutgers was a way bigger deal ... the B1G picked up New Jersey and more importantly the entire state of New York with Rutgers. Markets have zero to do with being blue-blood or not ... just being there is all that counts. Hence, Rutgers.
I didn't say it wouldn't add money to the pie. The question is does it add $200 million to the pie. I doubt that unless USC gets back to the USC of old, which they might do. UCLA has a lot longer way to go. As for TX and OU, they already have high ratings, especially OU. USC and UCLA do not. In other words, UT and OU drive their own TV numbers so when you add in Bama, UGA, AU, LSU, ATM, UF, and the top TV viewership teams of the SEC, you get a huge multiplier you don't get with USC and UCLA.
The number of people watching will be more from the existing B1G teams, not USC and UCLA. UCLA's biggest game in a decade was the LSU v. UCLA game, and it was because of LSU, not UCLA. Don't get me wrong ... tOSU v. USC/UCLA will be watched big. As will UM and PSU. It will drop dramatically after that. No one will care about Purdue v. UCLA, or even Wisky v. UCLA or Iowa v. UCLA. Nor for that matter, USC v. Purdue. Whereas at least OU and TX fans will watch OU v. Vandy, or TX v. USCjr.
I know it is going to add $20 million. Or at least that is what this article says and it's pretty detailed.
So a way to calculate a conservative UCLA-USC impact for LA is as follows: keep the in-footprint and out-of-footprint fee estimates at $1 and $0.39, assume that BTN will receive a similar percentage of penetration in LA as it does nationally (54.3/122.4=42.7 percent), and assume that that 42.7 percent all already had BTN at the out-of-market price (so going from $0.39 to $1). That gives 42.7 percent home penetration * 5.73 million homes = 2.45 million homes, which multiplied by $0.61 is $1.49 million extra per month, or $17.9 million extra per year.
I was being generous when I said $20 million.
Adding USC and UCLA could be huge for Big Ten Network
Going from the out-of-footprint per-subscriber fee to the in-footprint one even for just Los Angeles would massively boost Big Ten Network.awfulannouncing.com
You aren't suggesting USC wasn't the highest value target in the Pac are you? And there was a lot of reasons for the packaged deal, but UCLA also was quite high in added value for the conference. When you package them together there were no other two that would have added as much.
Yeah. We can't have any of that shit here on the hoop.
I agree with UCLA, not so much with USC. You hate them, I get it. I hated them when they were good in the early 00s because their bandwagon fans were insufferable. That said, USC simply has a swag about them that matters. It's LA, it's Hollywood. They have hot dancing girls (even though your Oregon Duck cheerleaders and dancers are about as hot as they get). USC against tOSU/UM/PSU is must-watch football.
Even USC vs Illinois or USC vs Maryland etc is more "must watch" than Illinois vs Maryland. Same for other conferences. Bama vs South Carolina or Bama vs Kentucky will draw more viewers than South Carolina vs Kentucky. The brand brings more eyeballs....even when the brand sucks. Maybe not as many when they suck, but still more than two "non brands".
