|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Jan 13, 2024 10:54:23 GMT -8
amp.idahostatesman.com/sports/college/mountain-west/boise-state-university/boise-state-football/article284130098.htmlFeel free to move Glove if you think this belongs in RT. The top rated MWC TV team last year was UNLV. I'm guessing that was influenced by Michigan game and bowl game. They nearly doubled Boise State, which FWIW played the other team to that played for the NC. However, Boise Tech played in double the number of nationally broadcast games. AF was only other MWC that averaged over 1M viewers, only playing 4 national broadcast games. Still, interesting info as Pac 2 starts to think about a media partner and which teams merit consideration to add to Pac.
|
|
|
|
Post by bvrbred on Jan 13, 2024 11:43:17 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 13, 2024 12:30:28 GMT -8
But, OSU's numbers are influenced the same way... but by more games... UW, Oregon, Colorado. It is an average, but unsure what those numbers actually prove/mean?? Everyone knows the MWC is a smaller media market and that numbers are skewed by playing in rivalry or versus other media draws. What I find interesting is the increases from 2022. Take Colorado St... up 500k on average. Just the 2023 Colorado game could account for most of that increase. OSU increased over a million average viewers in 2023. Again scheduling and opponent record effects that, I'm not sure how one can give meaning to averages that are influenced by several factors. OSU was not a better team in 2023, but they were a "story" after realignment. And, OSU plays larger market teams, but is OSU the draw? Cool to look at, but not sure what meaning can be drawn other than what is already known... smaller markets draw fewer eyes get less for media deals. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 13, 2024 12:51:16 GMT -8
I don't think the Idaho Statesman is coming up with the most accurate numbers.
The discrepancy between UNLV with 1.46 million viewers in five publicly rated games and the 287k cited in the Medium story is too big to ignore.
And according to the Nielsen ratings, Boise State had the most viewers in the MWC with a 590k average.
Nielsen's criteria is based on games that had a Nielsen rating, so Colorado State did not make the cut despite a billion people watching the CSU-Colorado game (actually 9.3 million).
"Colorado State had the best per-game Nielsen average for Group of Five teams at 4.8 million, but that was for only two games. The biggie for CSU, of course, was 9.3 million vs. Colorado."
My guess is that the criteria used by Medium is more inclusive (counts all games with available numbers) and therefore more accurate. Colorado State had an average of 814k (No. 51 overall) in the medium story, which leads the MWC. Boise State was second at 338k (No. 74).
Oregon State was No. 20 (1.74 million) in the Medium ratings and No. 28 in Nielsen with 2.44 million (8 games).
|
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Jan 13, 2024 14:46:07 GMT -8
www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/Source The Medium results include games where no data is available counted as zero. So if a game was streaming only and/or no #s avail, it is counted as zero. Likely reason so many MWC have ridiculously low #s. The Sports Media reflect only national broadcast games
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 15, 2024 11:26:37 GMT -8
www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/Source The Medium results include games where no data is available counted as zero. So if a game was streaming only and/or no #s avail, it is counted as zero. Likely reason so many MWC have ridiculously low #s. The Sports Media reflect only national broadcast games You can't get a full season count out of Sportsmediawatch. Nor do you get one from the Nielsen ratings or the Medium ratings but the Medium and Nielsen ones gives you a better look at overall seasons (Despite the. Medium,flaw of counting some games as zero), therefore you get bigger numbers in the other two. The problem is that Sportsmediawatch deals with far fewer games and so it can be extremely inaccurate if you try to compile a season rating (thus the extremely skewed UNLV numbers) based on the information given there. As far as I can see, that's what the Idaho Statesman writer did. IMO, the Nielsen ratings are probably the most accurate. |
|
|
|
Post by 415hawaiiboy on Jan 15, 2024 11:49:18 GMT -8
Doesn’t say too much about the schools national following, mainly the opponents and what tv stations (and their reach) the games show up on. And the kickoff times.
CBS Sports which shows a lot of MWC games does not report publicly their viewership numbers.
ESPN helped Boise State by showing a lot of their games. Same with BYU. Hawaii used to get that ESPN late night spot before late night was a thing. So, positioning yes, but not a sufficient measure of national appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 15, 2024 12:12:33 GMT -8
Doesn’t say too much about the schools national following, mainly the opponents and what tv stations (and their reach) the games show up on. And the kickoff times. CBS Sports which shows a lot of MWC games does not report publicly their viewership numbers. ESPN helped Boise State by showing a lot of their games. Same with BYU. Hawaii used to get that ESPN late night spot before late night was a thing. So, positioning yes, but not a sufficient measure of national appeal. I don't doubt that the MWC ratings are actually higher than you find on Medium or Nielsen. Games on the Pac-12 Network are not counted either and it had a big effect on OSU's 2022 season ratings. I'm not arguing that. I'm just pointing out that using just a couple games that were broadcasted nationally is going to give you an extremely skewed number. None of the ratings are without flaw. And there are other factors, such as when (day and time of day) the games are broadcast and opponent, etc. Not to mention the Colorado coach Prime hype anomaly. But if you are implying that the MWC's numbers would be significantly higher when compared to the "power conference" teams (as in ratings that are much closer in level), I would have serious doubts about that claim. |
|
|
|
Post by 415hawaiiboy on Jan 15, 2024 12:35:28 GMT -8
Doesn’t say too much about the schools national following, mainly the opponents and what tv stations (and their reach) the games show up on. And the kickoff times. CBS Sports which shows a lot of MWC games does not report publicly their viewership numbers. ESPN helped Boise State by showing a lot of their games. Same with BYU. Hawaii used to get that ESPN late night spot before late night was a thing. So, positioning yes, but not a sufficient measure of national appeal. I don't doubt that the MWC ratings are actually higher than you find on Medium or Nielsen. Games on the Pac-12 Network are not counted either and it had a big effect on OSU's 2022 season ratings. I'm not arguing that. I'm just pointing out that using just a couple games that were broadcasted nationally is going to give you an extremely skewed number. None of the ratings are without flaw. And there are other factors, such as when (day and time of day) the games are broadcast and opponent, etc. Not to mention the Colorado coach Prime hype anomaly. But if you are implying that the MWC's numbers would be significantly higher when compared to the "power conference" teams (as in ratings that are much closer in level), I would have serious doubts about that claim. I agree with you. My comment was just a general observation. There’s been numerous debates about this between MWC and AAC fans on the messageboards. The gist is some G5 schools do get higher viewership (Houston for example) than lower tier Power schools. Lower tier Power teams play the blue bloods and that helps ratings. Remember when Oregon State played at Hawaii in 2019 and the game was on Facebook Live? I think the total viewers peaked around 35K. That was one of the only time fans can see the real time numbers. |
|
