It must be Cal's basketball program since everything else is fairly equal. Stanford used to have the edge on football, but not these days.Econ141 said:
Can anyone tell me how to interpret the rankings in the graphic included in this link?
https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-oregon-and-washington-not
Why is Cal that low even if the corresponding numbers match Stanfurd?
WalterSobchak said:
Because it's based on an undisclosed methodology concocted by a retired TV executive that takes into account several highly subjective categories. When Cal wins there's no question we have more value than Stanford. We also very likely have more value when both teams are mediocre or bad. Only when Stanford wins big and Cal loses a lot are they more valuable to TV. This is pretty obvious to anyone who pays any attention. None of the Pac 10 teams have much reach outside their DMA, but Cal followed by Stanford probably have more than the others. This is nothing more than a measure of recent general perception of football + MBB program strength, with a slight nod to UW because they have a bigger DMA than Oregon. In other words, it's useless at best and biased at worst.
Yeah I think it's sorted by a hidden rank column that's probably based on some sort of scoring. Highly suspect IMO that Stanford and Utah are so high. At least Utah has their own decent fanbase, but nobody roots for either of those schools outside of their immediate circles (students, alumni, etc.). For example BYU dominates all of Utah including SLC despite not being in the DMA. And even they have no breakthrough reach to speak of beyond LDS nationwide. ASU too to some extent. I think UofA has a much stronger value based on their MBB program.Econ141 said:WalterSobchak said:
Because it's based on an undisclosed methodology concocted by a retired TV executive that takes into account several highly subjective categories. When Cal wins there's no question we have more value than Stanford. We also very likely have more value when both teams are mediocre or bad. Only when Stanford wins big and Cal loses a lot are they more valuable to TV. This is pretty obvious to anyone who pays any attention. None of the Pac 10 teams have much reach outside their DMA, but Cal followed by Stanford probably have more than the others. This is nothing more than a measure of recent general perception of football + MBB program strength, with a slight nod to UW because they have a bigger DMA than Oregon. In other words, it's useless at best and biased at worst.
I guess my question really is what is that table sorted by? Just his own ranking without any methodology or scoring?
