|
Replies: 39
| visibility 1
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I don't get the whole thing about the SEC having the SC
Dec 13, 2012, 6:41 PM
|
|
market. Do they think Clemson fans watch USUC games or vice versa?? Well, maybe the coots watch us because they are so obsessed with us.
|
|
|
|
 |
Associate AD [844]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1809
Joined: 9/12/04
|
My theory is.......
Dec 13, 2012, 6:45 PM
|
|
Everyone's kid I know that, well, lets just say, isnt the "sharpest knife in the drawer" ends up at USuC. That subset of kids is much bigger than the subset of kids that are going to Clemson. And, I think that the "out of state" enrollment percentage @ CU is greater than USuC (so I have been told - havent looked it up) - so, its just straight up math in SC.
Just my $0.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3706]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2272
Joined: 9/28/08
|
Clemson has a regional market
Dec 13, 2012, 6:48 PM
|
|
We have fans in Georgia, NC, and MANY in SC! Anyone who thinks that Clemson doesn't bring TV sets to the ratings is stupid!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I agree. that's just crazy talking to think Clemson
Dec 13, 2012, 6:50 PM
|
|
wouldn't add to their TV audience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1218]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 1965
Joined: 9/27/05
|
We would definitely add viewers....
Dec 13, 2012, 6:53 PM
|
|
but not as many as the states of N.C. and Va. Apparently, that's all the SEC cares about. Very frustrating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [352]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 828
Joined: 10/31/03
|
Do they really think
Dec 13, 2012, 8:45 PM
|
|
anyone in NC or VA watches college football?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19576]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17247
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Do they really think
Dec 14, 2012, 10:55 AM
|
|
Doesn't matter. Only takes a handfull of viewers to get cable companies to subscribe to their network. That's what it's about. If a cable company subscribes to SEC network they will get like 10c per customer regardless of who actually watches it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [158]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 290
Joined: 7/20/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
yeah gg...thats why DV holds 80,000 and the others 50,000
Dec 13, 2012, 10:30 PM
|
|
more coot logic
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24687]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42349
Joined: 7/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Maybe it would cause problems with scheduling times
Dec 13, 2012, 6:48 PM
|
|
of games?? IDK
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
I and a lot of other Clemson fans watch USuCk, when we're
Dec 13, 2012, 6:52 PM
|
|
not playing. We are watching them, hoping to see them lose. The networks know that. I wouldn't go there with your argument. It's pointless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: So is saying the SEC has the SC market
Dec 13, 2012, 7:07 PM
|
|
Not saying I haven't watched the coots but I don't make it a point to watch them as I have no interest other than seeing them get beat.
If I have something to do when they play, I don't stop what I'm doing to watch them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
The reason I and many other Clemson fans watch them IS our
Dec 13, 2012, 8:30 PM
|
|
interest in watching them get beat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [26]
TigerPulse: 30%
Posts: 63
Joined: 8/31/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16226]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12771
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Greenville, SC provided the 2nd highest rating for ABC's
Dec 13, 2012, 7:02 PM
|
|
Saturday night college football broadcasts this past season, behind only Birmingham, AL.
Link:
http://fangsbites.com/category/tv-ratings/
ABC's primetime broadcasts aired no SEC games (only on ESPN, as CBS owns exclusive broadcast network rights).
Food for thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [151]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 341
Joined: 7/8/11
|
That is interesting***
Dec 13, 2012, 7:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1446]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 3334
Joined: 11/27/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3677]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9417
Joined: 5/31/06
|
well, Palmettoson claims to have seen many, if not all SC ga
Dec 13, 2012, 7:04 PM
|
|
games this year
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4756]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8262
Joined: 9/13/01
|
It's not about how many people watch
Dec 13, 2012, 7:16 PM
|
|
It's about how many people are in the market and may *potentially* watch. To that extent, the South Carolina market is already in the SEC's domain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5912]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8567
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: It's not about how many people watch
Dec 13, 2012, 7:18 PM
|
|
Only if it is a per subscription price basis like the B1G.
In your world everyone would be fighting for BC and UCONN because of potential viewers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16226]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12771
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Get ready for the B1G Network model to disappear moving
Dec 13, 2012, 7:37 PM
[ in reply to It's not about how many people watch ] |
|
forward. When it was one college league network, there were premiums. Now that everyone is getting a network, the subscription revenue aspect is going to change drastically. The numbers that the B1G is using to promote the additions of Maryland and Rutgers are based on what they were doing when they were the only game in town.
Cable operators are a tough bunch and the last thing they're going to be out there doing is running the cost up for subscribers and/or taking a haircut in order to get a college league network on board. There's only so much to go around and that wall is right in front of us right now. Ask Texas how their new network is working out in terms of carriage and sub revenue, in their own state.
What we're likely going to start seeing is cable operators putting the revenue burden on the leagues through in-network advertising and sponsorships. The more compelling the programming is, the more people watch, and the more advertising revenue there is. And that's just cable, which itself is facing its own challenges in the internet and satellite realm.
It's not about potential, it's about eyeballs tuning in. The carrier revenue models just don't work otherwise in the long run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zealot [868]
TigerPulse: 50%
Posts: 1261
Joined: 1/29/10
|
I pull for two teams
Dec 13, 2012, 7:22 PM
|
|
Clemson, and whoever SC is playing.
I watch every down of every SC game on the edge of my seat just like I do Clemson games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I as well, but I have no interest in watching them
Dec 13, 2012, 8:08 PM
|
|
unless I have nothing better to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: PS Living in Cootlumbia I have my fill of them
Dec 13, 2012, 8:10 PM
[ in reply to I pull for two teams ] |
|
on a daily basis. Dayum sure not going to spend my free time watching them!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12533]
TigerPulse: 86%
Posts: 12246
Joined: 11/21/11
|
Really, you don't get it? They already have their games
Dec 13, 2012, 7:22 PM
|
|
carried in South Carolina. If they develop a network, having one team in South Carolina is all they need to get the prime carriage fees. It's really not hard to understand. I wish it wasn't the business model of today's conferences, but it is. Just read about the BigTen's decision making process and you will see that these conferences are not about adding a state that is already in their footprint. Ironically, 30 years ago the craze was adding teams that were close in proximity for rivalries as well as packed stadium and large fanbases that go to each other's sites. That is not the case now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3677]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9417
Joined: 5/31/06
|
I will give you a point for the last half of your post frien
Dec 13, 2012, 7:42 PM
|
|
friend.
I do not understand, nor do I care to , all the ins and outs of TV dollars and contracts and conference this and that. To me it all just seems so unnatural.
Just tee it up and lets go, whomever it is !
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 4271
Joined: 8/7/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1111]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1939
Joined: 7/8/99
|
If NCST/UVA is on same time as TN/ARK who would you watch?
Dec 13, 2012, 9:28 PM
|
|
Me i watch TN/Ark hence SEC has TV market
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Think I'd rather watch cars rust!!***
Dec 13, 2012, 10:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7390]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 8066
Joined: 11/8/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15730]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17365
Joined: 2/1/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [1051]
TigerPulse: 31%
Posts: 3302
Joined: 6/10/12
|
we will never be in the sec! ******
Dec 14, 2012, 10:32 AM
|
|
we will NEVER, EVER be in the sec. we can wish,hope, pray,beg, borrow and steal and it wont make it happen. there may be an outside chance of chance of getting in the big but i doubt it because they want stronger academic research schools. if we dont get in the big12, we will be in the acc forever and it looks like our bot and president are in favor of being in the acc. but the big question is will the acc survive as we now know it, if the sec, big, and big 12 raid the acc of 6-8 schools?imo if that happens the acc cant survive. i think we have to hope the big 12 takes us. everyone agrees there will be 4 power conferences with 16 members each. the rest will not exist as we now know them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15730]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17365
Joined: 2/1/99
|
Was this supposed to be a response to me? Because
Dec 14, 2012, 12:15 PM
|
|
it has nothing to do with my post.
For the record, I don't know that we'll never be in the SEC, but I'm not too concerned one way or the other. We're fine in the ACC. There's no reason to assume we'll go to four conferences. There's no need for it. It doesn't serve the fans or college football in general.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [102]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 114
Joined: 10/11/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1188]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1700
Joined: 1/14/12
|
Re: I don't get the whole thing about the SEC having the SC
Dec 14, 2012, 12:58 PM
|
|
It does not sound like you really understant the arithmatic here. The conference gets about 1 cent per cable/satellite household in a state if that state does NOT have a conference team in it. They get about 10 cents per household if the state DOES have a conference team in it.
USuCk already has SC in that 10 cent per household category for the SEC. They don't care who is watching what game on a given Saturday ... only that the potential for watching is there.
By putting an expansion team in a state that has no conference team, they put millions of new households in the 10 cent category and tens of millions of dollars in to the SEC TV contract. Adding Clemson in the state of SC would not produce a single penny of new revenue for ESPN, and thus would not enhance the value of the TV package to the SEC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3233]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 4960
Joined: 11/3/06
|
^^^This^^^***
Dec 14, 2012, 1:16 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 4271
Joined: 8/7/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [59]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 224
Joined: 11/21/10
|
Re: I don't get the whole thing about the SEC having the SC
Dec 14, 2012, 1:44 PM
|
|
Obsessed coots, eh?
Says the guy making a thread about SC, the SEC, and the "coots."
Oh, the ironing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5014]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2672
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I don't get the whole thing about the SEC having the SC
Dec 14, 2012, 1:50 PM
|
|
yes , I think Clemson people watch SC, and SC people watch Clemson. For different reasons ...obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 39
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
