Is Homogeneity Of Membership Good Or Bad?

[EMT]

The Big East game was on Fox OTA which is an Apples to Apples comparison to ESPN. If fact, it should be better because it is OTA.

Villanova-Creighton scored a 0.7 final rating and 1.1 million viewers in Saturday’s Big East Tournament final on FOX, down 22% in ratings and 21% in viewership from Seton Hall-Villanova last year (0.9, 1.4M). The Wildcats’ win was beaten head-to-head by Big 12 final on ESPN (2.3M) and the Mountain West title game on CBS (1.3M). It also earned a smaller audience than the Cincinnati-SMU American Athletic final (a.k.a. the “old Big East”) the following day on ESPN (1.2M).

Actually, in my opinion, it is not apples to apples. It ends up being what the ratings would be vs the content that they would have shown in its place. Big boy Fox showed 16 games all season. Even as a BE fan, I missed parts of games on regular Fox because I never thought to check out the channel on weekends. In the NYC market, I checked out FS1/FS2/CBSSN/YES/MSG/ESPN/CBS before I ever checked Fox.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-basket ... ule-092016

[Sactowndog]

I am quite aware of a Pyrrhic (capitalized) victory means and it is exactly what I meant.

If you win on the court and still can't deliver ratings you end up proving even more definitively that the league has a ratings/branding problem. In the case of the Big East they have taken it to an extreme: they are the #2 rated league, they have the defending National Champ and #1 ranked team in the nation playing, and they still draw a .7 rating. The frigging league has such a huge branding problem they can't even draw bandwagon fans.

All our success and poor ratings has done is cemented any lingering perception that no one beyond a small core group cares about this league. It is the text book definition of a Pyrrhic victory. But too many associated with this league are looking down through their noses to see the curve in the road ahead.

A Pyrrhic Victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. The only way you could possibly call winning on the court a Pyrrhic victory is if you believe we should lose on the court now to conserve resources for later because winning now isn't worth the resources expended. So, should we lose now to gain some advantage later? Is that what you are saying?

No I am saying that winning on the court in such clear fashion and not drawing any corresponding ratings, only further emphasizes to TV executives that the Big East can't draw ratings. It is a classic example of winning the battle (the game on the floor) and losing the war (capturing viewers/entertainment time). I am quite aware of the definition of a Pyrrhic victory. I used it as intended and you only further make my point by not even understanding the greater battle you are losing and losing badly.

[Sactowndog]

Pomona College, whatever the f that is.

Was that a serious comment?

Pomona is one of the most elite liberal arts colleges in the country, ranked #7 nationally by US News this year.

I think the significance of Cal Poly Pomona in this discussion is that someone who graduated from there, and has his roots in Fresno, Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley (but yes had a daughter at Butler), probably may not have the best advice for us or understanding of the Big East and our goals and perspective.

I'm not sure we get much interest in his area (not sure the Big East really ever did), which would be among the last places we'd penetrate, along with the Deep South i would guess. Kern County California i think is more similar to Boise or West Texas or Cheyenne or Wichita, than San Francisco or Los Angeles, but i might be off on that.

So if I'm right about Kern County, then from Sactowndog's perspective in his area of the country, Wichita would seem like a major draw. But to someone in New England or anywhere in the Big East footprint, Wichita might as well be Flin Flon Manitoba or Chibougamau in the upper Quebec north woods.

Anyway, I'm fine with his thoughts and i like getting a different perspective, but it's his repeating of the same talking points that is destroying this thread. He makes a point... several people explain the BE's thoughts on it... he repeats the same exact talking points.

So much wrong with this thread.

Pomona College does not equal Cal Poly Pomona

Sacramento Metro Population 2.149K, Indy Metro 1.756, Providence Metro 1.604

No I posted yet another more recent data point on the failure of Big East ratings in the context of this thread and I answered comments. This board and the Big East in general continues to put their head in the sand on this issue. I went away before and I will do so again.

[Bill Marsh]

Pomona College, whatever the f that is.

Was that a serious comment?

Pomona is one of the most elite liberal arts colleges in the country, ranked #7 nationally by US News this year.

I think the significance of Cal Poly Pomona in this discussion is that someone who graduated from there, and has his roots in Fresno, Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley (but yes had a daughter at Butler), probably may not have the best advice for us or understanding of the Big East and our goals and perspective.

I'm not sure we get much interest in his area (not sure the Big East really ever did), which would be among the last places we'd penetrate, along with the Deep South i would guess. Kern County California i think is more similar to Boise or West Texas or Cheyenne or Wichita, than San Francisco or Los Angeles, but i might be off on that.

So if I'm right about Kern County, then from Sactowndog's perspective in his area of the country, Wichita would seem like a major draw. But to someone in New England or anywhere in the Big East footprint, Wichita might as well be Flin Flon Manitoba or Chibougamau in the upper Quebec north woods.

Anyway, I'm fine with his thoughts and i like getting a different perspective, but it's his repeating of the same talking points that is destroying this thread. He makes a point... several people explain the BE's thoughts on it... he repeats the same exact talking points.

Sorry, but when I read the reference to "Pomona College", I thought it was about the college by that name which is one of the elite Claremont colleges in California. Cal Poly Pomona is a whole different kettle of fish.

Complete agree with your take on the perception of the Big East from the left coast. To me, the Wichita State thing is completely out in left field. VCU makes some sense because it's a geographic fit and can be seen as the 21st century equivalent of what UConn was back in 1979.

The thing I like about Sactown Dog's posts is that he challenges the conventional thinking of fans within the conference. It's valuable for any of us to question our own assumptions IMO. It doesn't mean that any of us would come around to agree with him, but the process of questioning may lead to some better ideas than we would have come up with otherwise. If we all just agree with each other, then what's the point of posting? We'll all become just a group of ditto heads.

I do think that he has a valid point with regard to TV ratings. The conference has to do something to address the issue or there will be a whole lot less money funding the conference in 8 years. The marriage of ESPN and the Big East in 1979 filled an empty niche, meeting a pent up demand. We now have the opposite situation where the market is saturated and ESPN is bleeding red ink. I think that most people who don't have time on their hands are pretty much watching their own alma mater and some of their own conference as opposed to the game-of-the-week mentality of the 1970's.

The other factor that helped the Big East back in the early '80's was the arrival of Patrick Ewing at Georgetown, paired with the presence of Chris Mullin at St John's and to a lesser extent John Pinone at Villanova. Ewing was must-see-TV, a generational player whose like hadn't been seen since Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain. That broadened the BE audience. It certainly would help to have a marquee player like him. Problem is that those guys don't stay around any more. Lebron was that kind of player, but he never even saw the inside of a college classroom. Now we maybe get one year of that kind of kid.

So, can a relatively small conference (by today's standards), comprised of mostly relatively small schools build a big enough audience to justify a big enough contract to enable them to compete with the mega-universities of the Big Ten and the rest of the F5? So far, so good. Inspiration is the child of preparation. I hope the leadership is preparing for the next level of challenge.

[BEXU]

Pomona College, whatever the f that is.

Was that a serious comment?

Pomona is one of the most elite liberal arts colleges in the country, ranked #7 nationally by US News this year.

Whoppee. Are all their alumni involved somehow in a discussion of BE basketball? This thread and the Archie Thread should just be merged in to the old "expansion" thread. That's all the non-BE posters want to talk about here. How to get their sub-par programs into the Big East and ruin it.

[NJRedman]

This link is why homogeneity is bad....

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2017/03 ... iewership/

You can't maintain top 5 performance with 9-10 level ratings. You simply won't have the money to maintain your coaches and facilities. Not adding Wichita State/VCU was a massive failure of vision when the league had a chance to add them as a pair. I am not a Wichita fan and I don't know if we could poach them from the AAC but it will be seen in the future as a major missed opportunity.

And I'm sure having VCU and Wichita State in the conference would have made those ratings sooooo much better

In fact they would. The current brand identity relates to a very narrow section of the population. That brand identity is tied closely to the homogeneity of the conference. Add two or even four top basketball only schools that aren't the current 'institutional fit" and you start to change the brand identity. That new brand identity would appeal to a much broader segment of the population.

Or you can chose to do nothing to address the issue and find yourselves in deep water 5-7 years down the road. Each data point just further reinforces the problem is significant. The conference Presidents, Commissioner and Fan continue to ignore it and pretend nothing can be done which is absolutely false.

Stop with this bullsh--. You aren't a fan of the big east, you never went to a school in the big east, you aren't from the conferences foot print. Your kid went to Butler, the one single non-catholic school and you are gonna sit here and tell us how we are wrong and what we need to to? How about we tell you what you need to do? You need to stop acting like you know what these schools need and stop acting like you know jack shit about the conference.

[NJRedman]

Was that a serious comment?

Pomona is one of the most elite liberal arts colleges in the country, ranked #7 nationally by US News this year.

I think the significance of Cal Poly Pomona in this discussion is that someone who graduated from there, and has his roots in Fresno, Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley (but yes had a daughter at Butler), probably may not have the best advice for us or understanding of the Big East and our goals and perspective.

I'm not sure we get much interest in his area (not sure the Big East really ever did), which would be among the last places we'd penetrate, along with the Deep South i would guess. Kern County California i think is more similar to Boise or West Texas or Cheyenne or Wichita, than San Francisco or Los Angeles, but i might be off on that.

So if I'm right about Kern County, then from Sactowndog's perspective in his area of the country, Wichita would seem like a major draw. But to someone in New England or anywhere in the Big East footprint, Wichita might as well be Flin Flon Manitoba or Chibougamau in the upper Quebec north woods.

Anyway, I'm fine with his thoughts and i like getting a different perspective, but it's his repeating of the same talking points that is destroying this thread. He makes a point... several people explain the BE's thoughts on it... he repeats the same exact talking points.

Sorry, but when I read the reference to "Pomona College", I thought it was about the college by that name which is one of the elite Claremont colleges in California. Cal Poly Pomona is a whole different kettle of fish.

Complete agree with your take on the perception of the Big East from the left coast. To me, the Wichita State thing is completely out in left field. VCU makes some sense because it's a geographic fit and can be seen as the 21st century equivalent of what UConn was back in 1979.

The thing I like about Sactown Dog's posts is that he challenges the conventional thinking of fans within the conference. It's valuable for any of us to question our own assumptions IMO. It doesn't mean that any of us would come around to agree with him, but the process of questioning may lead to some better ideas than we would have come up with otherwise. If we all just agree with each other, then what's the point of posting? We'll all become just a group of ditto heads.

I do think that he has a valid point with regard to TV ratings. The conference has to do something to address the issue or there will be a whole lot less money funding the conference in 8 years. The marriage of ESPN and the Big East in 1979 filled an empty niche, meeting a pent up demand. We now have the opposite situation where the market is saturated and ESPN is bleeding red ink. I think that most people who don't have time on their hands are pretty much watching their own alma mater and some of their own conference as opposed to the game-of-the-week mentality of the 1970's.

The other factor that helped the Big East back in the early '80's was the arrival of Patrick Ewing at Georgetown, paired with the presence of Chris Mullin at St John's and to a lesser extent John Pinone at Villanova. Ewing was must-see-TV, a generational player whose like hadn't been seen since Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain. That broadened the BE audience. It certainly would help to have a marquee player like him. Problem is that those guys don't stay around any more. Lebron was that kind of player, but he never even saw the inside of a college classroom. Now we maybe get one year of that kind of kid.

So, can a relatively small conference (by today's standards), comprised of mostly relatively small schools build a big enough audience to justify a big enough contract to enable them to compete with the mega-universities of the Big Ten and the rest of the F5? So far, so good. Inspiration is the child of preparation. I hope the leadership is preparing for the next level of challenge.

I'm fine with looking at ourselves for a way to get better and improve the product, but not this idea that we need to expand to up to 14 teams and that the fact we are private is whats hurting us. If we just added a few public schools we would be so much better. Like the country has this giant Catholic bias. F him, i'm sick of this same stupid argument after every season.

No one cares that his kid went to Butler. I bet he was on campus maybe twice a year and possibly twice ever.

[DudeAnon]

SactownDog is an idiot.

[gtmoBlue]

No he's not an idiot, merely stubborn, pigheaded, and belligerent. Sac may actually "believe" what he's spewing forth. It's not a poor argument, he's just using the wrong teams as flag wavers for the argument. If he was ushering the same drivel with the Kansas twins or a S'cuse-ND or a UNC-NCSt (when they leave the ACC by state order) combo - the "pushback" would not be as vehement. Even the Zags-SLU combo only gets pushback from the RR Perfectionists.

As was stated earlier he stirs the pot a bit unorthodoxly, but serves to stimulate thought and conversations. Now ol' Crawdadbucket, that's a different story. Crawdad is Stever Jr.

[Bill Marsh]

I think the significance of Cal Poly Pomona in this discussion is that someone who graduated from there, and has his roots in Fresno, Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley (but yes had a daughter at Butler), probably may not have the best advice for us or understanding of the Big East and our goals and perspective.

I'm not sure we get much interest in his area (not sure the Big East really ever did), which would be among the last places we'd penetrate, along with the Deep South i would guess. Kern County California i think is more similar to Boise or West Texas or Cheyenne or Wichita, than San Francisco or Los Angeles, but i might be off on that.

So if I'm right about Kern County, then from Sactowndog's perspective in his area of the country, Wichita would seem like a major draw. But to someone in New England or anywhere in the Big East footprint, Wichita might as well be Flin Flon Manitoba or Chibougamau in the upper Quebec north woods.

Anyway, I'm fine with his thoughts and i like getting a different perspective, but it's his repeating of the same talking points that is destroying this thread. He makes a point... several people explain the BE's thoughts on it... he repeats the same exact talking points.

Sorry, but when I read the reference to "Pomona College", I thought it was about the college by that name which is one of the elite Claremont colleges in California. Cal Poly Pomona is a whole different kettle of fish.

Complete agree with your take on the perception of the Big East from the left coast. To me, the Wichita State thing is completely out in left field. VCU makes some sense because it's a geographic fit and can be seen as the 21st century equivalent of what UConn was back in 1979.

The thing I like about Sactown Dog's posts is that he challenges the conventional thinking of fans within the conference. It's valuable for any of us to question our own assumptions IMO. It doesn't mean that any of us would come around to agree with him, but the process of questioning may lead to some better ideas than we would have come up with otherwise. If we all just agree with each other, then what's the point of posting? We'll all become just a group of ditto heads.

I do think that he has a valid point with regard to TV ratings. The conference has to do something to address the issue or there will be a whole lot less money funding the conference in 8 years. The marriage of ESPN and the Big East in 1979 filled an empty niche, meeting a pent up demand. We now have the opposite situation where the market is saturated and ESPN is bleeding red ink. I think that most people who don't have time on their hands are pretty much watching their own alma mater and some of their own conference as opposed to the game-of-the-week mentality of the 1970's.

The other factor that helped the Big East back in the early '80's was the arrival of Patrick Ewing at Georgetown, paired with the presence of Chris Mullin at St John's and to a lesser extent John Pinone at Villanova. Ewing was must-see-TV, a generational player whose like hadn't been seen since Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain. That broadened the BE audience. It certainly would help to have a marquee player like him. Problem is that those guys don't stay around any more. Lebron was that kind of player, but he never even saw the inside of a college classroom. Now we maybe get one year of that kind of kid.

So, can a relatively small conference (by today's standards), comprised of mostly relatively small schools build a big enough audience to justify a big enough contract to enable them to compete with the mega-universities of the Big Ten and the rest of the F5? So far, so good. Inspiration is the child of preparation. I hope the leadership is preparing for the next level of challenge.

I'm fine with looking at ourselves for a way to get better and improve the product, but not this idea that we need to expand to up to 14 teams and that the fact we are private is whats hurting us. If we just added a few public schools we would be so much better. Like the country has this giant Catholic bias. F him, i'm sick of this same stupid argument after every season.

No one cares that his kid went to Butler. I bet he was on campus maybe twice a year and possibly twice ever.

I agree. So forget about him and his love for WSU.

OTOH, the ratings are a serious problem. After 4 years it doesn't seem like ignoring them and figuring that they will improve with time is the answer. Any ideas on how to make them better? We had the defending national champs in the conference tournament finals and the ratings for that game were lower than last year.