I doubt it. They're getting the viewership from the biggest brand in texas regardless of the success UT has on the field. If UT remains an under-performer that's almost perfect for them as they get all the money from the viewership without someone that challenges the existing order.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
I doubt it. They're getting the viewership from the biggest brand in texas regardless of the success UT has on the field. If UT remains an under-performer that's almost perfect for them as they get all the money from the viewership without someone that challenges the existing order.
It's more likely Texas gets grumpy that NW and Indiana get more TV money than they do and sends out feelers to the Big Ten down the road if Big Ten and SEC don't merge.
If Texas isn't winning in a few years they'll blame it on not getting as much TV money as Big Ten teams. It's their way, it's what they are.
They have been playing even with Kansas lately and blame it on the SEC/Big Ten teams getting more media money. They'll do the same if/when Mississippi State beats them in some future decade. Could take 15-20 years but it'll happen any time they don't have top payout. They did have top media payout for quite a few years and didn't light the world on fire.
Is this something the school or AD has ever actually said? I know it gets posted on the board a lot and I get wanting a bigger media deal if you’re texas but they have always brought in more money then just about every other program regardless of their media deal
It’s more so that they blame everyone else but themselves. Also, they seem to have an attitude that money will solve a problem; whether that’s firing a coach and buying them out, or just building better facilities.
To be fair money does solve most problems or at least gives you a very wide variety of options, **** Texas anyways though
They had a long stretch where their media deal alone was #1 too. They really care about getting the biggest check and if they aren’t they’ll get grumpy when they lose.
Perhaps it is because UT uses their football money, not to improve the football team, but to support their general university non-sport academic budget. This is the real reason they are so money hungry. Apparently their student fees, state legislature, and donors do not provide enough money to staff and run the University.
If you remember, the snotty attitude and actions of Texas were what drove Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado out of our Conference. At least when OU was beating the poo out of us, they did it with a smile.
It will be interesting to see how Alabama, LSU, Auburn, etc. will tolerate UT's attitude. I agree that the first chance they get to go to the B1G for more money, they will find a way to go.
I read that ESPN was happy happy joy joy when UT went to the SEC, as then they could close the multiple ESPN UT channels that had been bleeding cash for their entire life.
It reminds me of a story I heard several years ago: A Texan was walking in downtown New York City when he looked up and studied the Empire State Building. A New Yorker standing next to him, heard him say "That's not so big, why we have out-houses bigger than that." To which the New Yorker replied "YOU NEED IT!"
It will be interesting to see how Alabama, LSU, Auburn, etc. will tolerate UT's attitude. I agree that the first chance they get to go to the B1G for more money, they will find a way to go.
I read that ESPN was happy happy joy joy when UT went to the SEC, as then they could close the multiple ESPN UT channels that had been bleeding cash for their entire life.
It reminds me of a story I heard several years ago: A Texan was walking in downtown New York City when he looked up and studied the Empire State Building. A New Yorker standing next to him, heard him say "That's not so big, why we have out-houses bigger than that." To which the New Yorker replied "YOU NEED IT!"
You do now realize that the sportsmediawatch numbers are the exact data behind the stupid Toledo draws more viewers per game than Virginia tech data, right? That it’s only because we choose to average a set of numbers based on math instead dividing the sum by 12, right?
Yes...but it has the same flaw...that some of you refuse to acknowledge. It has only a select number of games, for some teams. And those games are the high demand type games that if you only look at them, skew the numbers way higher artificially.
Taking that data and saying it is superior and doing "3rd grade math" without accounting for all the missing data points, is just as stupid.
You are right. A small sample size is a small sample size. But your data chose to make that small sample size worse, instead of compensate for that.
It’s like if you went out to the club and bagged one 7, two 8s, and a 9. You’d say, man when I go out I’m getting an 8 average.
But you actually didn’t come home with anyone 6 other times. What if I said those times were a zero? Now what if I said every time you went out all you got was a 3.2 average? Would that be correct? Nope. Am I doing third grade math? Or are you….
You seriously cant just admit as neither are good sources of true data. You cant just take the ISU vs OU games viewership on ABC, alone and say it is a good representation of all ISUs games. This is basically what you are doing with VT, you are taking the data from only a couple high rated games and saying it is a good representation.
Neither way is any better, quit trying to say yours is.
You dumb this, but this is the exact same thing you want to push. A guy has viewer data for a team for 5 games. There isn’t data for the other 7 games. He just assumes it is zero for the 7 games….and divides by 12 games. Then you say “well that’s what they average per game I guess”.
Ok. I am agreeing that a small sample size is not good to make assumptions. But that is not the argument. You are saying because there is a small sample size the average viewers for that team should suffer? I still don’t think you understand how to calculate an average
We’re doing the same thing again tonight. He doesn’t even realize it’s the same source just an idiotic way to analyze it.
The flaw is in Medium's formula. He is using Sports Media Watch's data for the following 3 games last season where VT played on a network that had available viewership data:
334,000 vs Old Dominion on ESPNU
1,600,000 vs West Virginia on ESPN
1,230,000 vs NC State on ESPN
Correct way to calculate an avg: (334,000 + 1,600,000 + 1,230,000) / 3 = 1,055,000
Medium's way to calculate an avg: (334,000 + 1,600,000 + 1,230,000 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0+ 0 + 0 + 0 + 0) / 12 = 264,000
Nope not saying that at all, just saying the data is incomplete. Ive already admitted what I posted was flawed. Apparently you dont think I am.
I did post 2 other data sources though, you failed to acknowledge those. But in reality no data is perfect. Especially when there is incomplete data.
You and 86 are still relying on a single data source with incomplete data, its just as flawed, but god forbid you admit that, Im done arguing with you.
But you guys better have links to back up what you say from now on....because thats what you expect from everyone else. And they better be perfect, because you guys are.
3 games out of 12.....is still only 1/4 of the data.
That is not an accurate representative of anything. You would not rely on only 1/4 of the data in anything.
I already agreed that the one source was not good.
But neither is a data source with so much missing.