+1. And of the schools in his list that i'd want would be Nevada - its far enough away that it wouldn't contribute to saturation of the Bay Area market. And add to the list UOP for bringing football back. The demographics around UOP have changed so much that it should be able to make it work. And never list Texas - I cant stand a greedy school that doesn't grasp the concept of equity and fairness.

People use "media markets" indiscriminately. New York, Boston and Philadelphia are large media markets but bad college football markets. Tuscaloosa Alabama and Columbus Ohio may not be great media markets in terms of numbers but they are fantastic college football markets. An advertiser knows that almost everyone in this market will be watching a game on Saturday which is a big advantage. This passion is what makes the SEC and Big 12 successful in spite of their heartland settings.

GB54;842539805 said:

---

People use "media markets" indiscriminately. New York, Boston and Philadelphia are large media markets but bad college football markets. Tuscaloosa Alabama and Columbus Ohio may not be great media markets in terms of numbers but they are fantastic college football markets. An advertiser knows that almost everyone in this market will be watching a game on Saturday which is a big advantage. This passion is what makes the SEC and Big 12 successful in spite of their heartland settings.

---

My understanding is that advertising is small potatoes. They want big markets because the big money is in the carriage fees. If the Pac-12 Network gets on the basic tier levels in a market with 10 million people, at their current rate of $0.39 per subscriber, that's $4,000,000 a month. Conversely, if you get into the Fresno Market, at around 500,000 people, that's only $195,000 per month. A lot more of them may watch college football, but I'm guessing the Pac-12 Network doesn't pull in $4,000,000 per month in advertising. So yeah, big markets matter.

I wouldnt mind sdsu and unlv

They make the most sense in terms of geo and market and have at least some decent reputation

I think a lot of us gave up on USC/UCLA and the AZ schools allowing us in.

For some, our new P5 pipe dream is the Big XII.

Academically, SDSU is rising. It's not on par with the CA schools of the Pac-12, but we are a national research institution, and the avg GPA of incoming freshman keeps on increasing each year. I was a student in the 90s, and no way my C average in HS gets into SDSU today. Back then, I just needed a good SAT score. My cousin got into UC Riverside and didn't get into SDSU...whatever that's worth.

grandmastapoop;842539812 said:

---

My understanding is that advertising is small potatoes. They want big markets because the big money is in the carriage fees. If the Pac-12 Network gets on the basic tier levels in a market with 10 million people, at their current rate of $0.39 per subscriber, that's $4,000,000 a month. Conversely, if you get into the Fresno Market, at around 500,000 people, that's only $195,000 per month. A lot more of them may watch college football, but I'm guessing the Pac-12 Network doesn't pull in $4,000,000 per month in advertising. So yeah, big markets matter.

---

Yes and no. More subscribers matter but so do viewers. The top twenty football markets have little to do with size but a lot to do with who watches. This pushes demand, ratings, pricing and ultimately the value of the product to networks. As Wilner has reported the conference has a major challenge in revenue.

Top 25 Markets for 2014 Top 25 Markets for 2013
No. 1 Birmingham: 9.2 rating No. 1 Birmingham: 9.2 rating
No. 2 New Orleans: 4.2 rating No. 2 Greenville: 4.9 rating
No. 3 Knoxville: 4.1 rating No. 3 Knoxville: 4.4 rating
Greenville: 4.1 rating No. 4 New Orleans: 4.3 rating
No. 5 Memphis: 3.8 rating No. 5 Nashville: 3.3 rating
Atlanta: 3.8 rating Memphis: 3.3 rating
No. 7 Jacksonville: 3.5 rating Columbus: 3.3 rating
No. 8 Oklahoma City: 3.4 rating Jacksonville: 3.3 rating
No. 9 Tulsa: 3.1 rating No. 9 Louisville: 3.2 rating
No. 10 Nashville: 2.9 rating Atlanta: 3.2 rating
Columbus: 2.9 rating No. 11 Charlotte: 2.9 rating
No. 12 Louisville: 2.7 rating No. 12 Oklahoma City: 2.8 rating
No. 13 Richmond: 2.6 rating No. 13 Orlando: 2.7 rating
Salt Lake City: 2.6 rating No. 14 Tulsa: 2.6 rating
No. 15 Charlotte: 2.5 rating Tampa-St. Petersburg: 2.6 rating
Austin: 2.5 rating No. 16 Austin: 2.5 rating
No. 17 Portland: 2.4 rating West Palm Beach: 2.5 rating
Orlando: 2.4 rating No. 18 Kansas City: 2.4 rating
Las Vegas: 2.4 rating Norfolk: 2.4 rating
West Palm Beach: 2.4 rating No. 20 Dayton: 2.3 rating
No. 21 Norfolk: 2.3 rating No. 21 Greensboro: 2.2 rating
Dayton: 2.3 rating No. 22 Raleigh-Durham: 2.2 rating
Greensboro: 2.3 rating Richmond: 2.2 rating
No. 24 Raleigh-Durham: 2.2 rating No. 24 Ft. Myers: 2.1 rating
No. 25 Tampa-St. Petersburg: 2.1 rating No. 25 Dallas-Ft. Worth: 2.0 rating
Phoenix: 2.1 rating Las Vegas: 2.0 rating

-30-

GB54;842539873 said:

---

Yes and no. More subscribers matter but so do viewers. The top twenty football markets have little to do with size but a lot to do with who watches. This pushes demand, ratings, pricing and ultimately the value of the product to networks. As Wilner has reported the conference has a major challenge in revenue.

Top 25 Markets for 2014 Top 25 Markets for 2013
No. 1 Birmingham: 9.2 rating No. 1 Birmingham: 9.2 rating
No. 2 New Orleans: 4.2 rating No. 2 Greenville: 4.9 rating
No. 3 Knoxville: 4.1 rating No. 3 Knoxville: 4.4 rating
Greenville: 4.1 rating No. 4 New Orleans: 4.3 rating
No. 5 Memphis: 3.8 rating No. 5 Nashville: 3.3 rating
Atlanta: 3.8 rating Memphis: 3.3 rating
No. 7 Jacksonville: 3.5 rating Columbus: 3.3 rating
No. 8 Oklahoma City: 3.4 rating Jacksonville: 3.3 rating
No. 9 Tulsa: 3.1 rating No. 9 Louisville: 3.2 rating
No. 10 Nashville: 2.9 rating Atlanta: 3.2 rating
Columbus: 2.9 rating No. 11 Charlotte: 2.9 rating
No. 12 Louisville: 2.7 rating No. 12 Oklahoma City: 2.8 rating
No. 13 Richmond: 2.6 rating No. 13 Orlando: 2.7 rating
Salt Lake City: 2.6 rating No. 14 Tulsa: 2.6 rating
No. 15 Charlotte: 2.5 rating Tampa-St. Petersburg: 2.6 rating
Austin: 2.5 rating No. 16 Austin: 2.5 rating
No. 17 Portland: 2.4 rating West Palm Beach: 2.5 rating
Orlando: 2.4 rating No. 18 Kansas City: 2.4 rating
Las Vegas: 2.4 rating Norfolk: 2.4 rating
West Palm Beach: 2.4 rating No. 20 Dayton: 2.3 rating
No. 21 Norfolk: 2.3 rating No. 21 Greensboro: 2.2 rating
Dayton: 2.3 rating No. 22 Raleigh-Durham: 2.2 rating
Greensboro: 2.3 rating Richmond: 2.2 rating
No. 24 Raleigh-Durham: 2.2 rating No. 24 Ft. Myers: 2.1 rating
No. 25 Tampa-St. Petersburg: 2.1 rating No. 25 Dallas-Ft. Worth: 2.0 rating
Phoenix: 2.1 rating Las Vegas: 2.0 rating

-30-

---

It was always my understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong), but rating points are a percentage of the total TV Households (1.0 rating equals 1% of the total TV audience), hence the total number of viewers a 5.0 rating has varies by the market. With 5.0 rating, a city with 1 million viewers nets about 50,000 total viewers, whereas a city with a 100,000 viewers nets about 5,000 total viewers. New York (7.44 Million TV households) pulling a .5 rating (37,200 viewers) still has more total viewers than Birmingham (711,000 TV households) at a 9.2 rating (6,541 total viewers). Based on this understanding, having a large TV market is still paramount.

Minot State Univ and Carroll College in Helena, MT....shore up the North.

SDSUStoner;842539871 said:

---

I think a lot of us gave up on USC/UCLA and the AZ schools allowing us in.

For some, our new P5 pipe dream is the Big XII.

Academically, SDSU is rising. It's not on par with the CA schools of the Pac-12, but we are a national research institution, and the avg GPA of incoming freshman keeps on increasing each year. I was a student in the 90s, and no way my C average in HS gets into SDSU today. Back then, I just needed a good SAT score. My cousin got into UC Riverside and didn't get into SDSU...whatever that's worth.

---

Your cousin should've applied to ASU.

MinotStateBeav;842539946 said:

---

Minot State Univ and Carroll College in Helena, MT....shore up the North.

---

Ha....I know of Carroll College....Have a good friend who lives in Helena and been there a few times. Cute little downtown area. Last time I was there it was minus -4 degrees.

golden sloth;842539943 said:

---

It was always my understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong), but rating points are a percentage of the total TV Households (1.0 rating equals 1% of the total TV audience), hence the total number of viewers a 5.0 rating has varies by the market. With 5.0 rating, a city with 1 million viewers nets about 50,000 total viewers, whereas a city with a 100,000 viewers nets about 5,000 total viewers. New York (7.44 Million TV households) pulling a .5 rating (37,200 viewers) still has more total viewers than Birmingham (711,000 TV households) at a 9.2 rating (6,541 total viewers). Based on this understanding, having a large TV market is still paramount.

---

You're right but you assume that a .5 rating in New York translates into demand for a niche product like a college football network and demand for subscribers let alone it being offered.

The SEC is in 75 million households, the Big 10 in 52 million, the PAC 12 in 26 million. I'm not sure this is a correlation to largest media markets. The PAC 12 has the second, sixth, twelfth, fourteeth, eighteenth and twentieth largest TV markets in the country-far more than any other conference. The PAC 12 thinks it's a distribution problem, but I suspect it's a demand problem, these are mostly pro markets

San Diego State has a low acceptance rate because literally everyone who lives in San Diego and probably half the people who live in OC apply there. It is a decent Cal State, but still below Cal Poly, Long Beach and probably San Jose State in terms of reputation outside of San Diego.

Even Wazzu is more highly regarded academically than SDSU. San Diego State is not a research university.

ASU accepts anyone with a pulse, but they still have some excellent graduate departments and the school is a major research university.

The Pac 12 made a huge mistake not accepting Oklahoma/Oklahoma St rather than Utah and Colorado. Utah has been a solid addition, while Colorado has been a complete disaster.

Adding the Oklahoma schools, Kansas and Texas would be the best case scenario.

I can't see the Pac 12 settling for lower tier schools like Boise, San Diego St, UNLV, etc. that won't bring much to the conference in terms of revenue, exposure or expanding the conference's footprint.

If Texas, the Oklahoma schools and Kansas leave the Big 12, I could see San Diego St getting a Big 12 invite.

Cal_Fan2;842539952 said:

---

Ha....I know of Carroll College....Have a good friend who lives in Helena and been there a few times. Cute little downtown area. Last time I was there it was minus -4 degrees.

---

I use to pass thru helena all the time heading to N. Dakota its ok..my favorite city is Bozeman, MT..really beautiful. Carroll College reminds me of St. Mary's in Moraga..nice small private school. My first year in school we played Carroll, brutal bus drive all the way across the state lol. They use to be really good at the NAIA level..but I think both them and Minot moved up to D2.

If that happened, TX and OK leaving, what would the Big 12 look like? Would it exist at all? Big 6? Big 8? What a Mess. As long as we have Cal Furd SC and UCLA as a bloc, we'll always have a solid conference affiliation.

Texas and Texas Tech are a package deal, according to WSJ:

"If academics were paramount, it's fair to assume TexasNo. 45 according to U.S. Newsmight leave the Big 12, which has limited scholarly distinction. One possible reason it hasn't: political pressure to drag along Texas Tech, an in-state rival that U.S. News ranks No. 160."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903703604576584771531621708

BearBackerinLA;842540067 said:

---

Texas and Texas Tech are a package deal, according to WSJ:

"If academics were paramount, it's fair to assume Texas—No. 45 according to U.S. News—might leave the Big 12, which has limited scholarly distinction. One possible reason it hasn't: political pressure to drag along Texas Tech, an in-state rival that U.S. News ranks No. 160."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903703604576584771531621708

---

Hmm. I've been to both. Lubbock has nothing on Pullman.

Academically we should get both Texas and Rice

Another year and another frenzy of discussion about whether Texas and Oklahoma and whoever could join the Pac-1?. Frankly, I'd expect them to join the B1G or SEC first though they'd probably not be able to go together. Both of those conferences are already 14 and we know that the Texas legislature will require Texas to take Tech with them. I'd think that the B1G would take Texas for academic reasons, the SEC for football reasons. We could see Texas playing three conferences off each other to get the best deal.

BowDowntoWashington;842540061 said:

---

San Diego State has a low acceptance rate because literally everyone who lives in San Diego and probably half the people who live in OC apply there. It is a decent Cal State, but still below Cal Poly, Long Beach and probably San Jose State in terms of reputation outside of San Diego.

Even Wazzu is more highly regarded academically than SDSU. San Diego State is not a research university.

ASU accepts anyone with a pulse, but they still have some excellent graduate departments and the school is a major research university.

The Pac 12 made a huge mistake not accepting Oklahoma/Oklahoma St rather than Utah and Colorado. Utah has been a solid addition, while Colorado has been a complete disaster.

Adding the Oklahoma schools, Kansas and Texas would be the best case scenario.

I can't see the Pac 12 settling for lower tier schools like Boise, San Diego St, UNLV, etc. that won't bring much to the conference in terms of revenue, exposure or expanding the conference's footprint.

If Texas, the Oklahoma schools and Kansas leave the Big 12, I could see San Diego St getting a Big 12 invite.

---

Actually, SDSU is a research university. It is listed as a National University as opposed to a Regional University where San Jose State, CSLB and Cal Poly reside. They have come quite a ways in the last several decades. Of course they aren't on par with a UC school, but they are designated as RU/H which is Research University/high activity. That is the same designation for schools like Boston College, BYU, or Syracuse and thus ranked higher than other CSU schools..... Cal or UCLA or Washington are classified RU/VH meaning Research University very high activity.

Doesn't mean they should be in the Pac12, because they shouldn't, but just wanted to clear that up for ya in the event you get on Jeopardy and one of the subjects is "Research Universities in the U.S."....Don't want to be scolded by Trebek.

tommie317;842540076 said:

---

Academically we should get both Texas and Rice

---

A new Academic-12 conference?
Texas
Rice
Cal
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Northwestern
Michigan
Notre Dame
Duke
Virginia
Vandy

UrsaMajor;842539506 said:

---

Some thoughts:

1. BYU is a non-starter for 2 reasons: not a research university and their refusal to play on Sundays (no problem for football, but basketball and Olympic sports need Sunday games).

2. The discussion about academics misses the point. It's not about acceptance rates or SAT scores, it is about the definition of a research university: does the university invest a lot in research, and does it grant a wide range of Ph.D.'s? ASU, for instance is a lousy undergraduate school, but has a number of well-established Ph.D. programs as well as recognized scholars. Currently, all Pac12 schools are research universities. By most definitions, SDSU, Fresno, BYU, Boise, etc. are not. Texas, OU, OSU, Baylor are.

3. One theory is that eventually we will go to 4 16-team "super conferences." If that happens, it is likely that the B12 will be put to rest, and the 4 survivors will be the B10, P12, ACC, and SEC. The B10 and P12 will then presumably cannibalize the old B12, with the remainder going to the ACC.

---

Why should it matter if a college is a research university? An athletic conference is for athletic competition, not research competition. Outside of the ASU community, does anyone really care what Ph.D. programs they offer? I would think athletic parity (or at least the potential for it) are what you are looking for. That, and money, of course.

In an interview Wednesday, Pac-12 President Larry Scott wouldn't comment on the conference's assessment of any specific school. But he said that when the conference considers new members "the academic brand is as important as the athletic brand." He said the Pac-12 "prides itself on being best of breed academically as well as athletically."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903703604576584771531621708

MisterNoodle;842540089 said:

---

Why should it matter if a college is a research university? An athletic conference is for athletic competition, not research competition. Outside of the ASU community, does anyone really care what Ph.D. programs they offer? I would think athletic parity (or at least the potential for it) are what you are looking for. That, and money, of course.

---

BearBackerinLA;842540090 said:

---

In an interview Wednesday, Pac-12 President Larry Scott wouldn't comment on the conference's assessment of any specific school. But he said that when the conference considers new members "the academic brand is as important as the athletic brand." He said the Pac-12 "prides itself on being best of breed academically as well as athletically."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903703604576584771531621708

---

That doesn't answer the question, Why should academics matter when it comes to being included in an athletic conference? Just because Larry Scott says it is true doesn't mean there is a rationale for it.

As an aside, surely you can see that his "best of breed academically" talk is lip service, just like all universities who participate in major college sports pay lip service to academics. He can't possibly believe that.

OaktownBear;842539282 said:

---

Too many Pac-12 teams have gotten the massively drunk, violent "you think you're better'n me?" treatment from Fresno fans. The last time Cal played in Fresno is, well the last time Cal will play in Fresno. After that game, the major donors at Cal were clear with the previous AD that scheduling a football game in Fresno was grounds for immediate termination. And they rarely throw their weight around on anything. Cal is not the only Pac-12 school that feels this way.

---

Boy you hit the nail on the head Oaktown. That was the worst road trip experience of my 35 years of following Cal football. To this day I remember the drunk teenage Fresno fan screaming at my wife and me, "we're going to kick Cal State Berkeley's ass tonight".
It'll be a cold day in hell before we make another trip to Fresno.
Go Bears!

MisterNoodle;842540085 said:

---

A new Academic-12 conference?
Texas
Rice
Cal
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Northwestern
Michigan
Notre Dame
Duke
Virginia
Vandy

---

I don't know where you get your information, but according to the Nortwestern message boards Cal is the academic equivalent of San Jose State. I don't see how we would fit in with all those other schools.

We should have taken Oklahoma & Oklahoma State when we had a chance to become the Pac-14. I think they are locked into the Big XII now, with heavy penalties for leaving.

Forget SDSU as they add nothing to the Pac-12 network (which already saturates that area) and dilutes recruiting.

I don't want Texas because they have shown they want to dominate. I'd be fine with Baylor, Rice, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State.

Otherwise, if we have to expand let's consider Colorado State (research university that is rumored to be next in line to be offered membership into the AAU, and a more natural rival for Colorado) and either Nevada or Utah State.

MisterNoodle;842540085 said:

---

A new Academic-12 conference?TexasRiceCalStanfordUCLAUSCNorthwesternMichiganNotre DameDukeVirginiaVandy

---

I'd take Washington and Wisconsin to make it 14

OaktownBear;842539282 said:

---

Too many Pac-12 teams have gotten the massively drunk, violent "you think you're better'n me?" treatment from Fresno fans. The last time Cal played in Fresno is, well the last time Cal will play in Fresno. After that game, the major donors at Cal were clear with the previous AD that scheduling a football game in Fresno was grounds for immediate termination. And they rarely throw their weight around on anything. Cal is not the only Pac-12 school that feels this way.

---

Is this worse than the Stanford Band pissing on your field?

And we are well aware of Fresno fan and their antics.

Cal8285;842539496 said:

---

Isn't the stadium future of the Aztecs WAY up in the air? If the Chargers get a new stadium in San Diego, maybe the Aztecs can play there, too. But if the Chargers go to LA, and the stadium is blown up, what of the Aztecs?

---

Yes and no. Our future Stadium is up in the air. Division 1 football isn't.

-The Aztecs will play in the new Charger Stadium if one is built.

-If the Chargers leave, the Aztecs have a deal with the City to play in Qualcomm for 5 years AFTER the Chargers leave.

-In that 5 years the Aztecs will have to make some decisions.

-3 locations have been chosen (not public yet but sort of known throughout us that are close to the situation) on or near Campus for a new Stadium. Something in the 45,000 to 55,000 range.

1979bear;842540066 said:

---

If that happened, TX and OK leaving, what would the Big 12 look like? Would it exist at all? Big 6? Big 8? What a Mess. As long as we have Cal Furd SC and UCLA as a bloc, we'll always have a solid conference affiliation.

---

I think the Big 12 would be forced to go to a East/West set up.

MisterNoodle;842540089 said:

---

Why should it matter if a college is a research university? An athletic conference is for athletic competition, not research competition. Outside of the ASU community, does anyone really care what Ph.D. programs they offer? I would think athletic parity (or at least the potential for it) are what you are looking for. That, and money, of course.

---

And really...This is where it is heading.

I had some battles with U$C fans and UCLA fans a couple of years ago on a board.

Their main point was...The Pac 12 would NEVER associate with the likes of San Diego State just for Athletics.

I reminded them that the Pac 12 already is associating with the likes of San Diego State just for Athletics. Aztec Soccer is in the Pac 12

SDSU (obvious reasons)
Colorado st (two teams in Colorado like Oregon, Arizona, and Washington)
BYU (bring back rivalry with Utah)

The fourth would be hard. I'd look at Wyoming, Boise st, Nevada, Utah st, and Fresno st.

Steve Aztec;842540186 said:

---

-3 locations have been chosen (not public yet but sort of known throughout us that are close to the situation) on or near Campus for a new Stadium. Something in the 45,000 to 55,000 range.

---

Don't you guys have a practice field/facility on Montezuma across from El Conq? Seems like that would be a good location if it's big enough for a full stadium. Tailgates would be epic if the new place is anything like what it used to be.

FrankBear21;842540193 said:

---

SDSU (obvious reasons)
Colorado st (two teams in Colorado like Oregon, Arizona, and Washington)
BYU (bring back rivalry with Utah)

The fourth would be hard. I'd look at Wyoming, Boise st, Nevada, Utah st, and Fresno st.

---

None of these schools have a shot at Pac-12 membership. Expansion is driven by $$$$, expanding the conference footprint and adding eyeballs and TV sets.None of these schools/programs do that.

Steve Aztec;842540191 said:

---

And really...This is where it is heading.

I had some battles with U$C fans and UCLA fans a couple of years ago on a board.

Their main point was...The Pac 12 would NEVER associate with the likes of San Diego State just for Athletics.

I reminded them that the Pac 12 already is associating with the likes of San Diego State just for Athletics. Aztec Soccer is in the Pac 12

---

Soccer doesn't drive a conference. Recent history has shown that football is the king of conference alignment. Heck, even basketball takes a backseat. So, what the USC/UCLA crowd meant to say was they would never associate with SDSU in football outside of a non conference matchup. I could care less what conference the other sports and I'm sure that feeling almost universal.