Wilner's take on whether Pac-10 expansion was worth it or not

[NashBuff]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...otball-and-basketball-was-expansion-worth-it/

Wilner did talk to analysts about the question of whether expansion was worth it from a dollars viewpoint.

From what I get from the article, it seems like Wilner realizes that the expansion was well worth it. He did say that CU and Utah brought an extra $800k annual revenue to the Pac-10 schools that they would have not gotten without expansion. The most the Pac-10 would have gotten is $200 million a year instead of the $20.8 to $21 million per year for the Pac-12.

Wilner puts the value of CU and Utah at $18 million each after factoring in the Pac-12 CCG. Given that Utah is coming from the MWC, you have to wonder if Wilner is undervaluing CU here (no offense intended for Ute fans).

Wilner does concede that without CU and Utah, there would be no Pac-10 CCG and there would be no equal revenue sharing. That alone should silence the critics of the expansion to 12 teams.

My take from this: :thumbsup:

 

[NashBuff]

Suppose the Big 12 stayed intact, would that new $130 million deal recently signed by the Big 12 and Fox be in fact closer to $200 million? That seems to make the Big 12's reasons for withholding that $$$ legitimate.

 

[Buffnik]

Interesting stuff.

I assume everyone is as happy as I am that we were able to trade Chip Brown for Jon Wilner as the journalist insider for the conference?

That alone, if all other things were equal, would make this conference switch a boon for CU and its fans.

 

[Del]

Wilner still isn't a big fan of CU but at least he is more accurate on his reporting. I'm still waiting for Chip to address the 35 million dollars that CU and NU allegedly would owe the Big XII lol!

 

[Buffnik]

Wilner still isn't a big fan of CU but at least he is more accurate on his reporting. I'm still waiting for Chip to address the 35 million dollars that CU and NU allegedly would owe the Big XII lol!

Exactly. I can deal with opinions that aren't chock full of CU sunshine. The fact that he was lukewarm at best about the expansion but still did an objective analysis that showed he was wrong is extremely cool. Being against the expansion for nostalgia and everyone playing everyone every year reasons is still valid... but he undermined his own strongest argument. That's solid reporting and makes me respect him all the more.

 

[BuffNut99]

Good comments from some Pac 10 folks on there... Plus the requisite "thank you, we're not worthy" from a Ute fan. Seriously, they must be in dreamland with how much they lucked out.

 

[Del]

Good comments from some Pac 10 folks on there... Plus the requisite "thank you, we're not worthy" from a Ute fan. Seriously, they must be in dreamland with how much they lucked out.

+1 Wow! We actually have some rational people here that can think critically which is refreshing.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

Interesting views on CU from there. People actually looking at the history of our program rather than the past 5 years. And it seems like while skeptical of Utah, people are leaning towards it being a good move. I believe that once Utah gets rolling with the recruiting of Pac-12 caliber athletes the Utes will be a force as well. Its going to be fun seeing power in the south being fought for each season. The north seems locked up right now, and with Phil Knight U having what it does, it is almost impossible to recruit against them in the North.

 

[sackman]

These Pac 12 fans are making it really hard to hate them. Damnit. I'm so used to snarky holier than thou comments from the nubs combined with "who the hell cares about Colorado" comments from OU and UT fans.

 

[dply]

These Pac 12 fans are making it really hard to hate them. Damnit. I'm so used to snarky holier than thou comments from the nubs combined with "who the hell cares about Colorado" comments from OU and UT fans.

+1 It is nice being able to read fan comments again and not wanting to punch the computer.

 

[Goose]

+1 It is nice being able to read fan comments again and not wanting to punch the computer.

And to think that those are the SMART fans of Nebraska, Texas, OU, etc.. The real special comments we missed out on were written on monitors with crayons as the average Big XII fan is screaming about how they're being denied their first amendment rights.

 

[Buffnik]

Consider that Texas and Texas A&M were the academic elites in the Big 12 along with CU... but they're in a state where over 75% of adults don't have a college education (one of the worst in the nation). Let's just say that the education level and analytical reasoning capabilities is at a much higher average these days. Plus, you don't get too many people from the west coast with "Don't mess with California!" style bumper stickers. Different attitude to go along with it. I feel like CU has come home. Definitely a higher level of smack that we'll see run from opposing fans along with people who actually come to this site and give solid analysis. I'm so ****ing happy.

 

[Liver]

Consider that Texas and Texas A&M were the academic elites in the Big 12 along with CU... but they're in a state where over 75% of adults don't have a college education (one of the worst in the nation). Let's just say that the education level and analytical reasoning capabilities is at a much higher average these days. Plus, you don't get too many people from the west coast with "Don't mess with California!" style bumper stickers. Different attitude to go along with it. I feel like CU has come home. Definitely a higher level of smack that we'll see run from opposing fans along with people who actually come to this site and give solid analysis. I'm so ****ing happy.

i believe this post should be reposted in the "california" thread in the pol forum! we really are... just.that.good.

:rofl:

 

[Mick Ronson]

Texas as a state is weird about "higher education". my sister went to Lewis and Clark in Portland and DU for grad school in information MA in library science (very respected program at DU, AKAIK).....she works at SMU as a director in the SMU library. she has two UT grads that work *for her*....yet they act like they went to Oxford and she went to two schools they never heard of and thereby are snarky about.

Baylor has tried to make a matter of perception that it belongs with Stanford, NWestern, Duke, Wake, and Vandy as top BCS privates....but, while it might be as expensive as those schools....it's not even close. ATM and UT are advantaged because they are a lot like the Big Ten publics.....gigantic 50,000 total enrollment schools that crank out alums and donors into their local and regional economies. CU just went over 30,000 for the first time last year.

 

[Darth Snow]

i believe this post should be reposted in the "california" thread in the pol forum! we really are... just.that.good.

:rofl:

:rofl: Well, some of the analysis is pretty suspect. The comments about how the Denver TV market is nowhere near other markets in the 12pac that then lists Denver as within 4 spots of those markets... Not the strongest argument. :lol: But then the next comment destroys the guy. I like these fans.

 

[GoBruinz]

These Pac 12 fans are making it really hard to hate them. Damnit. I'm so used to snarky holier than thou comments from the nubs combined with "who the hell cares about Colorado" comments from OU and UT fans.

Just wait until you play $C. I'm sure the fans will come on here and give you all the "holier than thou" you can take.

To be honest, I think it's a little bit of a honeymoon period with the new guys. If you take a look at the Washington boards, when it comes to Oregon they can be as snarky and vicious as anyone. Likewise ASU-Arizona. UCLA-USC. Etc.

Don't get me wrong, I think overall the fans in the Pac 10/12 are probably a little more rational than fans in Big XII or SEC country. But eventually you'll come across your share of @ssholes in the Pac too.

Count me in as another who think CU is an excellent fit with the Pac, and I am looking forward to future UCLA-CU competitions. We will probably suck this year (again), but hopefully we'll still beat Texas (again).

 

[Darth Snow]

Just wait until you play $C. I'm sure the fans will come on here and give you all the "holier than thou" you can take.

To be honest, I think it's a little bit of a honeymoon period with the new guys. If you take a look at the Washington boards, when it comes to Oregon they can be as snarky and vicious as anyone. Likewise ASU-Arizona. UCLA-USC. Etc.

Don't get me wrong, I think overall the fans in the Pac 10/12 are probably a little more rational than fans in Big XII or SEC country. But eventually you'll come across your share of @ssholes in the Pac too.

Count me in as another who think CU is an excellent fit with the Pac, and I am looking forward to future UCLA-CU competitions. We will probably suck this year (again), but hopefully we'll still beat Texas (again).

i'm running into sacky's problem here.

 

[BuffLuke80]

Texas just cant beat UCLA no matter how good or bad UCLA is and it's hilarious to me. They usually get 60 hung on them in the process lol.

 

[sackman]

Just wait until you play $C. I'm sure the fans will come on here and give you all the "holier than thou" you can take.

To be honest, I think it's a little bit of a honeymoon period with the new guys. If you take a look at the Washington boards, when it comes to Oregon they can be as snarky and vicious as anyone. Likewise ASU-Arizona. UCLA-USC. Etc.

Don't get me wrong, I think overall the fans in the Pac 10/12 are probably a little more rational than fans in Big XII or SEC country. But eventually you'll come across your share of @ssholes in the Pac too.

Count me in as another who think CU is an excellent fit with the Pac, and I am looking forward to future UCLA-CU competitions. We will probably suck this year (again), but hopefully we'll still beat Texas (again).

OK, but... We're really, really used to hating everybody. It's us against the world. We're backed into a corner and are snarling and biting at anybody who comes near us. You've been warned.

 

[BuffaloSoldier76]

Fact of the matter is that there are realistically 7 DMAs that the Pac-12 has laid claim to. If they want to change up the model and pay each school based on the number of people within their school's DMA footprint, I'd be fine with that too. Yes U$C and UCLA would get way more money than anyone else based on the size of the LA market, but CU would be 3rd ahead of the Bay Area schools after they split the San Francisco DMA in half. Just saying, if you want to split the money based on how many eyes you theoretically bring with you, that is where it falls out. That is a really simplistic and unrealistic model to follow, but it is one that some people are trying to attach with the assessment that CU didn't bring enough eyes to justify inclusion.

Los Angeles 5,666,900
San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,523,520
Phoenix (Prescott) 1,881,310
Seattle-Tacoma 1,874,750
Denver 1,572,740
Portland 1,197,780
Salt Lake City 953,950

 

[dply]

Fact of the matter is that there are realistically 7 DMAs that the Pac-12 has laid claim to. If they want to change up the model and pay each school based on the number of people within their school's DMA footprint, I'd be fine with that too. Yes U$C and UCLA would get way more money than anyone else based on the size of the LA market, but CU would be 3rd ahead of the Bay Area schools after they split the San Francisco DMA in half. Just saying, if you want to split the money based on how many eyes you theoretically bring with you, that is where it falls out. That is a really simplistic and unrealistic model to follow, but it is one that some people are trying to attach with the assessment that CU didn't bring enough eyes to justify inclusion.

Los Angeles 5,666,900
San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,523,520
Phoenix (Prescott) 1,881,310
Seattle-Tacoma 1,874,750
Denver 1,572,740
Portland 1,197,780
Salt Lake City 953,950

And if Phoenix counts Prescott then we get to count Colorado Springs bumping us over 2 million.

 

[somebody]

And if Phoenix counts Prescott then we get to count Colorado Springs bumping us over 2 million.

Umm, from Wiki Prescott pop = 43,217, C Springs = 416,427. Very comparable. :lol:

 

[dply]

Umm, from Wiki Prescott pop = 43,217, C Springs = 416,427. Very comparable. :lol:

Not the population the distance.

 

[BuffaloSoldier76]

Umm, from Wiki Prescott pop = 43,217, C Springs = 416,427. Very comparable. :lol:

Yeah, but they could count Tucson, which is a separate DMA at 461,450. There are a lot of the sub-1MM DMAs out there that are included in the Pac-12 footprint, but everyone is going to focus (rightfully so) on the big 7 because that is where the money is driven from.

 

[somebody]

Not the population the distance.

? Oh, I thought when you said it put us over 2,000,000, you were talking about population. You were in different solar systems..

 

[Buffarino]

Fact of the matter is that there are realistically 7 DMAs that the Pac-12 has laid claim to. If they want to change up the model and pay each school based on the number of people within their school's DMA footprint, I'd be fine with that too. Yes U$C and UCLA would get way more money than anyone else based on the size of the LA market, but CU would be 3rd ahead of the Bay Area schools after they split the San Francisco DMA in half. Just saying, if you want to split the money based on how many eyes you theoretically bring with you, that is where it falls out. That is a really simplistic and unrealistic model to follow, but it is one that some people are trying to attach with the assessment that CU didn't bring enough eyes to justify inclusion.

Los Angeles 5,666,900
San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,523,520
Phoenix (Prescott) 1,881,310
Seattle-Tacoma 1,874,750
Denver 1,572,740
Portland 1,197,780
Salt Lake City 953,950

Isn't the Denver metro area right around 2.5-3 million?

 

[dply]

? Oh, I thought when you said it put us over 2,000,000, you were talking about population. You were in different solar systems..

I was talking about how the Phoenix market included Prescott which is 100 miles away from Phoenix. Colorado Springs is 85 miles away from Boulder. So i was saying if Phoenix gets to include cities like Prescott then Denver should be able to include Colorado Springs.

Silly I know, but I don't think Colorado Springs is really far enough away to justify its own media market.

 

[BuffaloSoldier76]

Isn't the Denver metro area right around 2.5-3 million?

Yes, but the 1.57 million number is based on Nielsen's determination of the number of "TV homes" within the coverage area. It is guesstimation on their part with some logic behind it, but it is also the number that is used by everybody for determining things like advertising rates.

 

[Buffnik]

Regardless, equal revenue sharing is what will and should be. Good job, though. The point stands that CU brings at least its share of home market cable tv subscribers.

 

[dply]

Yes, but the 1.57 million number is based on Nielsen's determination of the number of "TV homes" within the coverage area. It is guesstimation on their part with some logic behind it, but it is also the number that is used by everybody for determining things like advertising rates.

Ah so including Colo Springs wouldn't raise us to 2 million then. Forget everything i wrote. :lol: