And the crossover game is usually friggin Iowa or Wisconsin. Even Nebraska.
USC and UCLA to join B1G in 2024
- Thread starter jimmygoiu
- Start date
You again post irrelevant bs. Human kidneys? The entire point of this discussion was, I believe, the value of one school versus the other in terms of tv contract revenue. Only a complete moron, like you must be, can't fail to see that even w/l records are, to a degree meaningless. The only thing that matters is which school draws more eyes to the tv sets. Purdue doesn't. It's just that simple.
PU has no national following committed enough to watch their games, in virtually any sport. PU doesn't win NCAA championships consistently in anything either now nor in the past. There is no storied history of Purdue athletics in anything, hence no one is really interested in them even with marginally winning seasons. The school is unattractive, the coeds are unattractive, your football field by mid October really starts to look like crap and your basketball arena has friggin benches.
Yes, you have a big drum and a really creepy guy that walks around in a big boilermaker suit with a really big head, that's about it. You produce pretty good engineers, farmers and one guy that walked on the moon. Talk about that and spare us any more long dissertations on how PU is more valuable to the B1G than IU. If you were my banker or financial advisor I'd be moving my money.
He is both and "idiot" and a "troll".
Honest ? Three Natty's. WBB, Mgolf and? Not remembering.
Well, we shall see who is correct. You asked me for my opinion and I gave it in good faith. Playing OSU, MSU, Michigan and Penn St would make you correct if the games are competitive. In most recent years they have not been. As I wrote, I don't enjoy a blowout regardless of who is winning.
Posted by Champs76:
"You again post irrelevant bs. Human kidneys? The entire point of this discussion was, I believe, the value of one school versus the other in terms of tv contract revenue. Only a complete moron, like you must be, can't fail to see that even w/l records are, to a degree meaningless. The only thing that matters is which school draws more eyes to the tv sets. Purdue doesn't. It's just that simple."
The point that I stated was that basic Economics informs us that something that cannot be sold has no way to measure its value. Examples are many. I was attempting to explain that by using an alternative example. I do note that nobody has claimed that my point from economics is in error.
As for W/L records not affecting viewership, they clearly do. W/L is positively correlated with viewership. Do you suggest that they are not? What does "...to a degree..." mean if not that there is a positive correlation? Duke is a classic example; they are not a large school. They do not have a huge alumni association. They are in NC. but if you go to stores in NYC and Chicago you see a lot of people in Duke gear. Don't you think that their basketball success over the last generation has something to do with that? And why their games appear a lot on national television? Gonzaga is another example; medium-sized city in a rural environment in a not populous state and a small school. Georgetown is a small school but you used to see a lot of Hoya gear when they were a big deal. Gonzaga and Georgetown get primetime games because of their records and not because of the size of their alums or local fans.
I have been assured here that Purdue is irrelevant but IU is not. If so, according to data posted and cited by a poster from this site, and seemingly not challenged, is that Purdue outdrew IU by 1/3. So how do you explain that? Twitter data was cited to infer viewership, but the one thing that has been clearly demonstrated by Musk is that Twitter's data is very suspect.
"You again post irrelevant bs. Human kidneys? The entire point of this discussion was, I believe, the value of one school versus the other in terms of tv contract revenue. Only a complete moron, like you must be, can't fail to see that even w/l records are, to a degree meaningless. The only thing that matters is which school draws more eyes to the tv sets. Purdue doesn't. It's just that simple."
The point that I stated was that basic Economics informs us that something that cannot be sold has no way to measure its value. Examples are many. I was attempting to explain that by using an alternative example. I do note that nobody has claimed that my point from economics is in error.
As for W/L records not affecting viewership, they clearly do. W/L is positively correlated with viewership. Do you suggest that they are not? What does "...to a degree..." mean if not that there is a positive correlation? Duke is a classic example; they are not a large school. They do not have a huge alumni association. They are in NC. but if you go to stores in NYC and Chicago you see a lot of people in Duke gear. Don't you think that their basketball success over the last generation has something to do with that? And why their games appear a lot on national television? Gonzaga is another example; medium-sized city in a rural environment in a not populous state and a small school. Georgetown is a small school but you used to see a lot of Hoya gear when they were a big deal. Gonzaga and Georgetown get primetime games because of their records and not because of the size of their alums or local fans.
I have been assured here that Purdue is irrelevant but IU is not. If so, according to data posted and cited by a poster from this site, and seemingly not challenged, is that Purdue outdrew IU by 1/3. So how do you explain that? Twitter data was cited to infer viewership, but the one thing that has been clearly demonstrated by Musk is that Twitter's data is very suspect.
I quit reading at the B1G west is very competitive.
Maybe that's his way of letting us know that everyone in the west sucks equally since Wiscy is supposedly down?
First thing he's said that makes any sense.
In most recent years IU has had far more viewership per year than Purdue. It has nothing to do with either IU’s or Purdue’s fanbases. Your viewership was up last year because you played teams in the top 10 of viewership which isn’t normal for you. It wasn’t because more Purdue fans were watching the game than normal.
Take your L and head back to GBI.
I’ve already explained to you why Purdue had more viewership last year. Did you not understand? It had nothing to do with Purdue’s record. It had everything to do with playing ND, OSU, and Tennessee. You are supposed to be better this coming year, yet your viewership will be down significantly from last year. That should be proof enough to you that your W/L record is irrelevant.
Big Ten West football preview: Wisconsin, Purdue, Iowa, Minnesota all have a shot
Wisconsin? Purdue? Iowa? Minnesota? The Big Ten West is up for grabs
Big changes are coming to the Big Ten, but for now the Badgers, Boilermakers, Hawkeyes, Gophers and even the Cornhuskers could contend for a division title.
www.espn.com
You may not think so, but the writers at ESPN obviously disagree.
Those games represented 25% of the schedule. But there was a premium of 33% in viewership. so mathematically, how does 25% turn into a 33% in larger numbers if the one that is lower has normally larger numbers? Do you not realize how difficult it is to make that math work?
Do you also realize that the Tennessee game was played at 2:00 PM on a Thursday that was Dec 30th, not a holiday? That is not exactly a time that would attract a large viewership.
Your rationale does not seem likely when you consider realistic math scenarios.
EDIT:
I just saw that bowl games are not included in the numbers published by your own source (Miller) so that eliminates the Tennessee game from your explanation. Your math gets even more difficult.
Last edited:
Can we just give a trophy to the longest reply and call it a day?
How does a "numbers guy" not understand that outliers skew an average?
You are correct that Tennessee was not included as I just did the math on it. You were incorrect in thinking the Tennessee game would have had poor ratings due to it being at 2PM on a Thursday. It was your highest viewed game at 5.59 million viewers.
For the 2022 season, you had approximately 19,590,000 views total (weekly views listed below). Of those 19 million views, 11,720,000 (59.83%) came from the 3 games against OSU, Notre Dame, and Michigan State.
Your 2022 Nonconference opponents generated 3,149,000 views in 2022 (thank you Notre Dame). In 2023 you don't have a marquee non conference game. Total views of your non conference games will likely be under 1 million given the 5 year viewing average of the opponents.
In 2022, your crossover Big Ten games generated 9,624,000 viewers. MSU and OSU generated over 9 million in those two games alone. In 2023, you do get a big crossover game with PSU which will most likely get over 4 million viewers since it is in primetime week 1 with no competing games. I will even give you 5 million viewers for arguments sake. Your other two crossover opponents are IU and Maryland. Even if the PSU game gets over 5 million viewers, you still won't come close to the 9.64 million viewers you got from the crossover games last year. The remaining schedule (Big Ten West games) should be very similar viewership-wise to last year.
Given the data above, Purdue should be expected to take a big step back from a viewer perspective.
Purdue 2022 Viewership by Week:
Indiana - 484k
Northwestern - 718k
OSU - 4.74M
MSU - 4.4M
Nebraska - 1.3M
Wisconsin - 734k
Iowa - 3.43
Minnesota - 413k
Illinois - 367k
Notre Dame - 2.58M
Uconn - < 131k
Oregon State - 439k
Purdue 2023 Opponents 5 yr average viewership:
PSU - 2.55M
Indiana State - <50k
Syracuse - 694k
FAU - <50k
Minnesota - 803k
Maryland -681k
Nebraska - 1.51M
Wisconsin - 2.27M
Iowa - 1.57M
Illinois - 401K
Northwestern -867K
Indiana - 1.17M
Good grief. I’ve been following along and he’s consistently said this season. He’s showing you why.
My puzzlement is citing 2023 Opponents when we were writing about 2022.
Also, in estimating, what numbers do we use:
IU 484K vs 1.17M
Neb 1.3M vs 1.5M
Minn 413K vs 803K
Wisc 734K vs 2.27M
NW 718K vs 867K
MSU vs OSU is not a large percentage (<10%)
Iowa 3.4M? vs 1.57M
MD over UConn (large difference)
I just don't understand which numbers are supposed to be used.
We were talking about the proposed bet of which team would have more viewers this season (aka the 2023 season) between IU and Purdue.
I threw you a bone and used the average 2015-2019 viewership when projecting the 2023 viewership for Purdue. The actual numbers will likely be much lower because as I’ve proven for you the big name outliers skew the data.
While IU has a 5 year weekly viewership average of 1.17, you shouldn’t be expecting 1.17 viewers for the IU vs Purdue game. Last year there were 484k viewers which is much more realistic for what it will be this year. Again, I was throwing you a bone to show that even with the inflated average numbers, Purdue’s viewership will still be way down, because you are losing two marquee games (1 in the non conference and 1 in the cross play games).
I really don’t know what’s so hard for you to understand here. You are either being purposely obtuse because you know I’ve proven to be correct, or you just lack intelligence. I’m leaning towards you being purposely obtuse.
Good frigin grief. He’s said per 5 year average projecting what the numbers might be. Reading comprehension is your problem. Just give up and walk away or you guys can do an English duel.
He can’t walk away as he has no arms or legs left after this debate at the bridge.
First of all, this is normally considered the 2022 season as the vast majority of games will be played in 2022.
My puzzlement is given 5-year data vs single-year data, should not the longer time be used as it would reduce outliers overly influencing the data set? Isn't that why is data analysis one uses the concept of Regression to the Mean when using a multi-year horizon and estimating forward?
Also, you are not factoring in time slots? In 2021, IU had 5 primetime slots, Purdue had 1. Gametimes are used by networks as a way to stimulate viewership. IU was coming off good seasons in 2019 and 2020 but the season of 2021 was not good - no B1G wins. IU was coming off a series of better seasons than Purdue.
So putting together a tv schedule for 2022, where do you slot a team with reduced expectations (based upon the previous year)? Would you assign a high profile slot or a lesser one? I think that most people would choose the more competitive team. By the way, in the tv contract with the NFL in recent years, the networks have flexibility in the later part of the season to slot more attractive games into better timeslots. That is also why there is a lot of TBA in the timing for the B1G schedules.
Given that the B!G West is being projected to be competitive among a number of teams (Purdue included), would it not make sense, and be expected to occur, that those games among competitors would get favorable slots? And teams with reduced expectations get less desirable slots? If I am assigning slots, that's what I do?
That also does not factor in the emergence of a popular individual player, e.g. Rondale Moore, who had a huge game in the evening broadcast against OSU and attracted a lot of media attention. Media attention is positively correlated with viewership. If O'Connell gets a lot of publicity, doesn't that matter?
My puzzlement is given 5-year data vs single-year data, should not the longer time be used as it would reduce outliers overly influencing the data set? Isn't that why is data analysis one uses the concept of Regression to the Mean when using a multi-year horizon and estimating forward?
Also, you are not factoring in time slots? In 2021, IU had 5 primetime slots, Purdue had 1. Gametimes are used by networks as a way to stimulate viewership. IU was coming off good seasons in 2019 and 2020 but the season of 2021 was not good - no B1G wins. IU was coming off a series of better seasons than Purdue.
So putting together a tv schedule for 2022, where do you slot a team with reduced expectations (based upon the previous year)? Would you assign a high profile slot or a lesser one? I think that most people would choose the more competitive team. By the way, in the tv contract with the NFL in recent years, the networks have flexibility in the later part of the season to slot more attractive games into better timeslots. That is also why there is a lot of TBA in the timing for the B1G schedules.
Given that the B!G West is being projected to be competitive among a number of teams (Purdue included), would it not make sense, and be expected to occur, that those games among competitors would get favorable slots? And teams with reduced expectations get less desirable slots? If I am assigning slots, that's what I do?
That also does not factor in the emergence of a popular individual player, e.g. Rondale Moore, who had a huge game in the evening broadcast against OSU and attracted a lot of media attention. Media attention is positively correlated with viewership. If O'Connell gets a lot of publicity, doesn't that matter?
Lol Originally you argued that the 2021 data was indicative of what we will see going forward because “trends matter”. I argued 5 years worth of data was a better show of viewership. I even included the 2021 data in the 5 year data to give us the 6 most recent years of data to show IU produces more viewership. You shook that off and said 2021 is all that matters. Now you are reversing course?
Either you understand how viewership works, or you don’t. Clearly you don’t.
Purdue’s viewership will be significantly down from last year in the coming season. I’ve already showed you why.
Similar threads
