If you go off media marketing centers, ACC should have the best deals with the access to pretty much every city on the East Coast. Nearly every populous state on the East Coast has an ACC School in it.
The thing is, people on here are looking at it too much based on population centers and overall media markets and not necessarily college football media markets. No one has talked about that point despite the fact that I have brought it up in nearly every post in this thread.
Sure, LA has 19 million people but do they have 19 million people that would actually watch and care about college football?
This is why the tv deals, merchandising, etc. favors\value schools in the middle of no where like Oklahoma over USC right now and it is why Oklahoma is higher on this list:
The 10 most valuable programs in college football
Whether you guys admit it or not, the links about CFB's most profitable programs are relevant to this argument. It shows the value of the brand and marketing is about Brands and Customers, not about physical locations.
I guess to frame our disagreement differently, does USC truly bring Hollywood and 19 million people even when they are good? My answer is, not really. If USC did bring all of the stuff you guys point out, then yes they would be the true opportunity of the lifetime and rankly they would be valued #1 in all of those CFB program rankings. I don't think USC brings any of the stuff you talk about because I don't think Los Angeles is a big college football city.
Now they do bring a fraction of it but does that fraction that USC brings to the table outweigh Oklahoma's brand and what it brings to the table. That is the real question and in the current reality, my answer would most definitely be no.
I am not sure why I am getting so much hate for bringing that point up. It is a very logical argument but logic seems to not win often on this board (at least with some people).
Does that clear things up
@Wild Turkey?
Basically, in my opinion, USC really doesn't bring Hollywood or 19 million fans. It has very high cost of living, high taxes, and is overcrowded. The program also has struggled in recent history and is currently behind programs like Oregon and Notre Dame that they will face on an annual bases.
Compare that to Oklahoma who is a top ten program revenue wise, recruiting wise, and fanbase wise. Oklahoma has been far more relevant in recent history and it is about to step into a league with at least 4-5 marquee matchups a year (not every SEC program will be a marquee matchup). Oklahoma was (until Riley left) in a decent position to at least go 9-3 in its first year in the SEC if not better. It was a far more stable program than USC.
Taking everything listed in last two paragraphs, Riley would have been dumb to leave Oklahoma if his position was actually stable and Oklahoma was willing to fork up at least $ 12 Million a year. My thought is that things between Riley and Oklahoma's administration must have not been very amicable. However, that is all speculation. I am sure our resident Oklahoma fans could do a better job explaining things.
