This is crap...Go Texas Go Big 12

[4down20]

They have? How? With your opinion?

Too funny...

Where's your proof to support your BS?

Yes, TV ratings are all based on my opinion and that's why I'm Bill Gates rich.

 

[bbwvfan]

Yes, TV ratings are all based on my opinion and that's why I'm Bill Gates rich.

So... I'm still waiting. Where is proof that the fans did not have a part of the change? That the comments were nothing but a PR stunt?

You give me ratings as proof?

 

[4down20]

So... I'm still waiting. Where is proof that the fans did not have a part of the change? That the comments were nothing but a PR stunt?

You give me ratings as proof?

You were the one who named ratings as proof the fans had something to do with it.

The college football playoff… and the BCS NCG are a different animal. Fans sent a clear message. They had no interest in watching a rematch of a game that included an opponent deemed unworthy by most. You cannot fall on its interest was only regional. You can use that for the SEC Network. This was the BCS NCG, it is of interest to the entire country!! If you really think TV ratings reflect regional interest, why have SEC games been the highest rated college football broadcasts?

And with the dismal ratings of the LSU vs Bama BCS NCG, ESPN jumped all over the playoff idea. Coincidence?

All I did was say that the ratings drop was likely because of the regional matchup. Which is actually pretty common if you look at the history of NCG ratings. Whenever Texas is in in the game, there is a big uptick in ratings for example due to the market size etc.

You made the claim, I debunked it. But I guess you've changed your position on that now?

 

[mad2mc]

I'm sure there are multiple reasons, but it's near impossible to get an out of conference game that late in the season that isn't scheduled in every year(FSU, GT, Clemson, etc, OOC rival games).

As far as revenue, you don't really get revenue when you do home and home for 1 game. If you pay to bring in a team, then you get revenue both years. It's also why neutral site games are prefered if you can get them. Because neutral site = both teams paid that year, no return "free" trip. But to get neutral site games you have to be a team that has good pull. LSU did it's home and home with Wisconsin at neutral sites near each other, so I'm pretty sure they both get paid for both games.

Alabama has played the 5th toughest schedule this year according to Sagrin even with the FCS game. There is no lack of quality teams on the schedule. How much tougher do you think the schedule should be? Or is replacing the FCS school with some MAC team a bigger team?

Except the data doesn't support it. Here are the playoff contender SoS right now.

Alabama: #5
Baylor #59
Oregon #36
Miss St #39
TCU #37

Other SEC teams:

Auburn #1
Ole Miss #8

And btw, WVU has the #6 SoS this year, grats.

Nothing stated here is new information.

Nobody wants to play Arkansas right now, and it's not because of their OOC wins.

Ummm, I don't need moral victories.

RR was leaving WVU no matter what. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but WVU is not a top destination. The cycle of coaches leaving teams like WVU for "Greener(Mo Money)" pastures is a large part of why college football top programs stay that way, while middle of the road teams stay that way as well. This is just a fact of college football. It's very unlikely that Dan Mullen stays at Miss St after this season. They just aren't a coaching destination school. Someone will throw money at him, he will take it.

Nothing stated here is new information. Still disagree about your moral victories. You seem to think that everybody is attempting to have one when they reply to you.

I think your panties are in a wad mostly.

I don't wear panties or thongs, so no. You were the one who whined that if your postings are not wanted then you will not post anymore on this board. Bitch move. Too funny. 4th down 20 when he doesn't get his way. They picking on me Momma.

I haven't been hostile at all, nor have I even taken easy shots.

Neither has anybody else but I can show you a pot shot.

The perception isn't the same among those who actually matter in these things.

Damn! That didn't take long. You're hysterical.

Not sure what you are talking about with 4 best teams.

If you can't understand this, we will leave it alone. No sense discussing something that needs to be explained to you over again.

I've done it for over a year. It's not like things don't get said about other teams already.

As we already know. Nothing knew on this front.

If I thought I was wrong, I wouldn't post it....

Novel idea, but most on this board can admit when they are wrong. Try that sometime. For now, I will agree to disagree with you. It appears that you cannot have a normal conversation.

 

[bbwvfan]

You were the one who named ratings as proof the fans had something to do with it.



All I did was say that the ratings drop was likely because of the regional matchup. Which is actually pretty common if you look at the history of NCG ratings. Whenever Texas is in in the game, there is a big uptick in ratings for example due to the market size etc.

You made the claim, I debunked it. But I guess you've changed your position on that now?

You debunked nothing. The ratings for the bogus 2012 game were the lowest since 2005. At a time when the college game was growing astronomically with TV revenue and interest nationwide, the low TV rating was shocking to all involved in the BCS. Hence why such a drastic and quick movement was made.

I asked you to debunk the PR approach you've tossed out there... give me what I'm looking for... will you?

The ratings for the AU vs FSU... another regional game... was much higher. Right? Where do you come up with your bullshit?

 

[4down20]

You debunked nothing. The ratings for the bogus 2012 game were the lowest since 2005. At a time when the college game was growing astronomically with TV revenue and interest nationwide, the low TV rating was shocking to all involved in the BCS. Hence why such a drastic and quick movement was made.

I asked you to debunk the PR approach you've tossed out there... give me what I'm looking for... will you?

The ratings for the AU vs FSU... another regional game... was much higher. Right? Where do you come up with your bullshit?

Umm, the previous year featuring Oregon and Auburn only pulled in a 15.2, only 1.2 pts higher than 2012, so there was a 1.2 drop off from the previous year.

The Oregon and Auburn game had a much larger drop in the number of people who watched it, going from a 17.2 in Texas vs Alabama, down to that.

So would you say the fans were "sending a clear message" when the previous years drop was double that of the game you say caused such?

And while it's true it was the lowest since 2005, 2008 was only .2 higher than 2012. So, your big ratings gain lasted only 3 years, and of those 3 years 2 of them were in the 15 pt area, and 1 was in the 17 point area which by anyone who reads data would correctly call that a spike, not a trend.

PS: More people watched the rematch than the 1st game.

 

[bbwvfan]

So... basically... you still got nothing! Weird...

 

[bbwvfan]

Maybe you're not such a subject matter expert after all... I would think you'd have documents for me on how the conferences decided to run a PR scheme...

What 'cha got for me?

 

[4down20]

So... basically... you still got nothing! Weird...

Maybe you're not such a subject matter expert after all... I would think you'd have documents for me on how the conferences decided to run a PR scheme...

What 'cha got for me?

As best I know, common sense isn't transferable, especially to people who stick their fingers in their ears and yell la,la,la in response to everything.

I notice you didn't answer the question.

If the 1 pt ratings drop in 2012 was the fans speaking loud and clear, what message were the fans sending the year before that when it dropped 2 pts?

As best I can tell, you lack the balls to have an honest discussion.

 

[bbwvfan]

As best I know, common sense isn't transferable, especially to people who stick their fingers in their ears and yell la,la,la in response to everything.

I notice you didn't answer the question.

If the 1 pt ratings drop in 2012 was the fans speaking loud and clear, what message were the fans sending the year before that when it dropped 2 pts?

As best I can tell, you lack the balls to have an honest discussion.

Yeah... I'll answer your question after you provide some form of proof to support your BS. I already provided you with direct quotes regarding how the fans made a difference.

Don't go Straw Man on me...

Just look up some links for me to shut me up... then you won't get any more la... la... la...

 

[Anotherwvufan]

Bama fans are right up there with Arkansas fans. Not quite as entertaining though.

Where is Sleepy when we need him?

Gotta say, Dad must love this 4.20 guy, makes him look like a genius.

 

[4down20]

Yeah... I'll answer your question after you provide some form of proof to support your BS. I already provided you with direct quotes regarding how the fans made a difference.

Don't go Straw Man on me...

Just look up some links for me to shut me up... then you won't get any more la... la... la...

Your avoidance of the question says everything. If you could make a point with it, you would have jumped at answering it in a heartbeat.

You brought up bullshit, now you got called on it.

I'm not even sure what kind of link you want from me. Are you suggesting that whatever the conferences say must be the truth regardless of evidence?

 

[bbwvfan]

Your avoidance of the question says everything. If you could make a point with it, you would have jumped at answering it in a heartbeat.

You brought up bullshit, now you got called on it.

I'm not even sure what kind of link you want from me. Are you suggesting that whatever the conferences say must be the truth regardless of evidence?

No... I just want you to provide me with a link to support your bullshit opinion. It ain't that hard.

I provided you with the link. Now you going all straw man on me. Another true sign of defeat...

Too funny...

 

[4down20]

No... I just want you to provide me with a link to support your bullshit opinion. It ain't that hard.

I provided you with the link. Now you going all straw man on me. Another true sign of defeat...

Too funny...

I've given you all the data you need.

Which of these facts do you disagree with?

1. Fans were already massively in favor of a college playoff before the Alabama vs LSU rematch.
2. The so called drop in ratings was actually less of a drop in the previous year and near exactly the same as it was in 2008.
3. The Big12, Pac12 and Big10 conferences all voted against playoffs prior to the rematch, even in the face of fan wishes.

Btw, please take a few minutes to learn what a strawman argument is and save yourself some future embarrassment.

I have no idea what kind of link you expect. Are you saying you want a link where the conferences come out and say that is the reason? Because LOL if so.

 

[bbwvfan]

I've given you all the data you need.

Btw, please take a few minutes to learn what a strawman argument is and save yourself some future embarrassment.

I have no idea what kind of link you expect. Are you saying you want a link where the conferences come out and say that is the reason? Because LOL if so.

OK… let me lay it out for you…

I originally posted that college football fans were partly responsible for the change from the BCS to the CFP. You tried to educate us by explaining how the commissioners and college presidents were the ones to vote for the change, and college football fans had nothing to do with it. You mentioned how the SEC and ACC proposed a playoff… which was actually a Plus 1… but I let that one slide…

I provided you with quotes from BCS executives and conference commissioners citing college football fans were partly responsible for the vote to change the post season to a playoff system. You then responded that this was nothing more than a PR ploy, and that I must not know anything about PR.

I asked you to provide me a source or sources from a conference or conferences that would refute the quotes I cited for you. Since you made the argument that the conferences were merely using a PR tactic to explain the changes, I asked you for facts to support your argument.

I provided you with facts to support my proposition. I asked you to do the same. You cannot do so; therefore, your PR claim is nothing but a bullshit opinion. You lost the argument.

Instead of admitting defeat, you provided data on the BCS NCG ratings and requested a comment from me. This is using the straw man. You attempted to attack a side point instead of addressing the original point.

You can thank me again for educating your ignorant ass.

 

[4down20]

Before I start to reply, let me just "educate" you once again.

The playoff system we have today is the Plus 1 system. Geez dude, if you are going to make accusations, at least learn what it is. I mean it is EXACTLY what we have now.

Plus-One system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Plus-One system gained popularity because, unlike many other proposed formats, it did not significantly extend the season for players and coaches. Under the system, the top four teams in the country were assigned to a playoff. The teams were seeded 1-4; the 1 seed plays the 4 seed and the 2 seed plays the 3 seed.[3] The winners advance to the national title game; the overall postseason remains largely the same, save for the extra game, hence the name “Plus-One.” This is the format that will be employed in the implementation of the College Football Playoff, which will succeed the BCS beginning in the 2014-15 season.

Now go ahead and cry some more, call me arrogant or whatever for educating you yet again.

 

[4down20]

OK… let me lay it out for you…

I originally posted that college football fans were partly responsible for the change from the BCS to the CFP. You tried to educate us by explaining how the commissioners and college presidents were the ones to vote for the change, and college football fans had nothing to do with it. You mentioned how the SEC and ACC proposed a playoff… which was actually a Plus 1… but I let that one slide…

Really? Here's your quote:

Which BCS game had the lowest TV ratings? And, you come on here and try and educate us that the common fan had nothing to do with the change to the playoff format… too funny!

Of which you were wrong about which BCS game had the lowest TV ratings. On top of which, I proved to you that the ratings of other games were in the same general area, and that the biggest drop in ratings happened the previous year, not the year of that game.

But of course, you lack the balls to admit you were wrong - yet again.

I provided you with quotes from BCS executives and conference commissioners citing college football fans were partly responsible for the vote to change the post season to a playoff system. You then responded that this was nothing more than a PR ploy, and that I must not know anything about PR.

You did not say "partly responsible". You said they gave in to fan pressure and cited things like the BCS ratings. And the reason I said the fans weren't the reason is because the fans were already pushing for the playoffs long before that game, and that didn't change their minds then.

And what alternative thing do you think those commissioners and executives would have to say? Do you understand how business works at all? Do you know what PR is? Hell I work for a small business and I make up shit like that all the time. You never give real answers to questions like that, you give the answer that sounds the best.

I've never doubted that the conferences and such claimed that. Ever. But the fact remains there is no real evidence to support it. You've tried to present some, and I've debunked it.

I asked you to provide me a source or sources from a conference or conferences that would refute the quotes I cited for you. Since you made the argument that the conferences were merely using a PR tactic to explain the changes, I asked you for facts to support your argument.

So basically - evidence be damned, you will only accept someone saying directly - "We went to a playoff because we were tired of the SEC getting ahead in the current format and wanted a better chance to show off our brand".

Are you fucking serious?

I provided you with facts to support my proposition. I asked you to do the same. You cannot do so; therefore, your PR claim is nothing but a bullshit opinion. You lost the argument.

No you didn't, you gave quotes. They said it was for the fans? Shocker! Did you honestly except them to say anything else?

I guess next you'll be telling me that FSU is actually trying to do the right thing in regards to Jameis Winston and that the dates that just so happen to be changed multiple times to happen at the end of the season isn't of any concern at all. Because you know, that's what FSU said and nobody ever gives bullshit excuses for PR reasons.

Instead of admitting defeat, you provided data on the BCS NCG ratings and requested a comment from me. This is using the straw man. You attempted to attack a side point instead of addressing the original point.

You can thank me again for educating your ignorant ass.

You brought up the BCS ratings, and were wrong about it as I have proven multiple times. I went back and quoted to prove it above. In fact, that's pretty much what started this discussion because before that the topic was about ESPN and bias.

But as I said, you lack the balls. I guess I shouldn't expect too much from a guy who didn't even know what the plus 1 system was to start with, even after we finally get it.

 

[bbwvfan]

Of which you were wrong about which BCS game had the lowest TV ratings. On top of which, I proved to you that the ratings of other games were in the same general area, and that the biggest drop in ratings happened the previous year, not the year of that game.

But of course, you lack the balls to admit you were wrong - yet again.

I provided the quote for you. WVU vs Clemson had the lowest BCS rating of all time. Not sure I understand your point… I lack the balls? Too funny you are… you need to stop…

Here was my quote… check out the underlined section… Ooops… who is the fool?

The outcry from fans has reached a fever pitch in light of sagging bowl television ratings, which have declined 37 percent since 1998, the first year of the BCS. The lopsided national championship game last month drew a 14.0 rating — the third-worst in the BCS era — and West Virginia's 70-33 rout of Clemson in the Orange Bowl was the least-watched BCS game ever.

"We can't afford to be tone-deaf," Benson said. "We need to listen to the fans, and there's a strong undercurrent."

You did not say "partly responsible". You said they gave in to fan pressure and cited things like the BCS ratings. And the reason I said the fans weren't the reason is because the fans were already pushing for the playoffs long before that game, and that didn't change their minds then.

Right… because there is a huge difference between what you just quoted at the start of this ridiculous post and this…

And, you come on here and try and educate us that the common fan had nothing to do with the change to the playoff format… too funny!

It really is hard to believe anyone would want to attempt to make this a point of argument. You ain't the sharpest boy…

My mother always taught me not to pick on kids who are less smart… less skilled than me. So, I will stop making you the fool. You keep coming back with nothing but your bullshit opinion.

Everyone that follows college football understands the controversy behind the bogus 2012 BCS NCG. The ratings sucked, and quick action was taken.

I am bored with you…

 

[4down20]

I provided the quote for you. WVU vs Clemson had the lowest BCS rating of all time. Not sure I understand your point… I lack the balls? Too funny you are… you need to stop…

Here was my quote… check out the underlined section… Ooops… who is the fool?

We are talking about National Championships. Who gives a crap if Clemson and WVU was the lowest rated bcs bowl game? Why would I even compare that to the NC, and obviously it has nothing to do with.

The LSU vs Alabama rematch was not the 3rd lowest of all bowl games as you seem to be claiming with your underlined part, it was just the 3rd lowest of the national championship games - the list I gave you.

As far as it being compared with other BCS bowl games, they don't bring in 14's like ever. The closest BCS Bowl game to bring in ratings near the NCG is the Rose Bowl, which usually does 10-13ish. The 2012 NCG was still rated higher than any non-national championship bowl game. Your claims that the ratings were so low is just plain false.

Right… because there is a huge difference between what you just quoted at the start of this ridiculous post and this…

The post I quoted of you was your first post on this topic. Before that the discussion was about ESPN bias. Don't get mad because someone calls you on your bullshit.

It really is hard to believe anyone would want to attempt to make this a point of argument. You ain't the sharpest boy…

You were the one who said you were going to "let is slide" that the SEC was pushing for a plus 1. I merely pointed out that the plus 1 is what we have today, which you obviously didn't know when you decided to "let it slide" by pointing it out.

My mother always taught me not to pick on kids who are less smart… less skilled than me. So, I will stop making you the fool. You keep coming back with nothing but your bullshit opinion.

Everyone that follows college football understands the controversy behind the bogus 2012 BCS NCG. The ratings sucked, and quick action was taken.

I am bored with you…

Dunning?Kruger effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[4down20]

Btw, the ratings for other bowl games in 2012 were down way more than the LSU vs Alabama game was with 1 exception.

BCS Bowl Game Ratings Are Down Pretty Significantly in 2012 [UPDATE] | The Big Lead

Orange Bowl (West Virginia over Clemson, 70-33): 5.3 rating.In 2011, the Orange Bowl between Stanford and Virginia Tech drew a 7.1.
Sugar Bowl (Michigan over Virgina Tech, 23-20 in OT): 7.0 rating.
In 2011, the Sugar Bowl between Ohio State and Arkansas drew a 9.5.

Fiesta Bowl (Oklahoma State over Stanford, 41-38 in OT): 9.7 rating.
In 2011, the Fiesta Bowl between Oklahoma and Connecticut drew a 7.1 rating.
Rose Bowl (Oregon over Wisconsin 45-38): 11.8 rating.In 2011, the Rose Bowl between TCU and Wisconsin drew an 13.1 rating. The 2010 Rose Bowl between Ohio State and Oregon drew a 13.8.

So, lets do a little math here.


Alabama-LSU 14.0, drop of 1.2pts
WVU-Clemson 5.3, drop of 1.8pts
Michigan-VT 7.0, drop of 2.5pts
Oregon-Wisconsin 11.8, drop of 1.3 pts


All those BCS bowl games had a bigger drop in ratings than the Alabama vs LSU game you claim is proof the fans had an impact.


The exception in that list was the OkSt-Stanford game, which rose 2 pts. Which isn't a surprised considering UConn was in the previous game, combined with curious people wondering if OkSt was really any good etc.


But sure, the drop in ratings that was less than the other drops was the reason things changed.