GannonFan wrote:
Come on, nova is no different. My wife went to nova as well and her stories about guys like Lawson and his team aren't vastly different than UNC. Again, maybe UNC went a little further than others, but the concept is hardly new.
Well, she is much younger than me. I had the likes of Whitey RIgsby, Joe Rodgers, Reggie Robinson, Chubby Cos and John Mastronardo in my classes. They attended and participated. Chubby a little less than most.
I really doubt that Nova, Delaware, St. Joe's, Penn, and like colleges did anything remotely like what was reported in NC. It's one thing to guide a student athlete to teachers who are easy graders. But, to give out grades and credits for phantom classes? I would be very surprised if any of those schools I mentioned did anything that ridiculous.
Mastronardo? The same guy who went to jail about a decade ago for running an illegal gambling operation and is currently ready to cop a plea on another gambling charge again this year? Yeah, the guy's a saint, I'm sure, though, that he never did anything amiss until after he graduated from nova.
Big East, FOX Sports 1 ratings pick up steam in March
(Editorial Note: This is the first of three installments diving into the TV ratings for FOX Sports 1 and the Big East. To see the full TV data, head over to our Google Spreadsheet, compiled by Andrei Greska using the data from Sports Media Watch.)
One of the biggest questions going into the inaugural season of the reconstituted Big East was how would the move to FOX Sports 1 would affect ratings. I speculated around this time last year that FOX had vastly overpaid for the Big East as it wasn’t much of a ratings boon on an individual or group level. A cluster of private institutions with relatively small enrollments simply doesn’t have as big a base as a behemoth Land Grant U.
With one season under the belt, how did those ratings turn out?
Short answer. They were awful.
As a whole, FS1 averaged 108,535 viewers and 0.07 rating in the 155 games it broadcast. In comparison ESPN, the competitor FS1 aims to beat, averaged 1,431,634 viewers and a 0.95 rating. To put that into further perspective, the least watched game on ESPN this season would have been the fourth-most watched game on FS1, drawing 410,000 viewers and a o.3 rating. Marquette was the featured team in that game.
But realistically, absolutely no one in their right mind would put the Worldwide Leader, a 30-year-old established brand with more klout and influence than any sports channel ever created, as a measuring stick for a network in the infancy of its infancy. Instead, what was truly in question was how it might compare to ESPN2, ESPNU and NBCSports, peers that FS1 might be able to rival in a short amount of time.
FS1 was able to top NBC Sports, but fell a bit short of ESPNU and well below ESPN2. This is pretty much in line with where it was projected to be eight months in, if not a tad below the original outlook. FS1 boasts that it reaches 90 million households, about 9 million less than ESPN2 but 15 million more than ESPNU and 12 million more than NBCSN. It will be interesting to see how the ratings compare in Year 2, once finding the channel isn’t an adventure and the brand becomes a part of the general fan’s sports rotation.
But in this day and age, waiting a year is akin to waiting a lifetime. The jury is already out the prognosis is negative. FS1 sucks. The Big East sucks. Run while you can. Is there any merit to it?
Let’s take a closer look.
The first thing that most analyses of the FS1 basketball ratings fail to acknowledge is the sheer breadth of coverage is bound to dilute the data. What does that mean? Having more nationally televised games will mean there are more clunkers with little audience interest being shown. Only diehards are going to tune in as Villanova takes on Towson at 5 p.m. on a Sunday.
Whereas before these cupcakes were limited to regional coverage, and thus not included in the data, they now tell the world exactly how meager the audience is. It also chips at the overall average a bit, skewing the average numbers downward. More national TV games is definitely a benefit worth touting, but it’s a double edged sword.
For FS1 as a whole, the month of November was brutal, ratings wise, with the average basketball telecast drawing in 64, 813 viewers and a .03 rating. Limited to just games featuring a Big East team, the numbers were even worse (59,688 viewers and 0.2 rating). One factor is simply that no one knew it existed. Sure, there was a media blitz, but I couldn’t tell you the amount of times we got Tweets asking what channel FS1 was at for ‘X’ cable company. And this was from fans actively seeking out the game, not casual viewers settling in for the night.
The biggest factor, though, was the dearth of quality games. Of the 16 tilts broadcast on FS1, only four were between high-major teams. Unsurprisingly, those garnered the top three most viewed games, with Marquette at ASU coming in fifth. The rest were contests that would be lucky to have made ESPNNews, and would have been relegated to regional coverage 95% of the time.
The ESPN networks have the luxury of owning the rights to so many leagues, they can pick and choose the most interesting non-conference games with the best teams and most passionate fan bases. It doesn’t have to settle for Providence vs. Vermont when it has Memphis vs. Oklahoma State on ESPN and Michigan vs. Iowa State on the Deuce. FS1 simply doesn’t have that luxury at this point, and won’t until it picks up some more contracts. (It currently shares PAC-12 duties with ESPN and the PAc-12 Network and has a smattering of Conference USA games as well). Throw in the fact that the ESPN networks practically have a monopoly on the early season Tournaments and FS1 doesn’t stand a chance.
If this is the case, though, then there should be an obvious uptick in ratings and viewers for FS1 once the conference season began as there are more interesting tilts and bigger names on regular basis. Does the data bare this out?
ESPN ESPN2 ESPNU ESPNNews NBCSN FS1
November 1,233,000 359,628 121,750 110,500 157,100 64,813
December 1,464,769 501,051 141,650 33,000 77,600 77,381
January 1,486,367 449,514 139,688 58,143 47,529 97,263
February 1,430,477 378,608 139,792 48,625 92,500 112,639
March 1,414,030 396,143 161,417 73,143 70,857 200,080
Yes. 1,000 times, yes.
FOX Sports 1 was the only network to see positive growth every month of the season. Here’s an easier to read graph, with ESPN taken out for clarity.
FS1 more than tripled its average viewership from November 2013 to March 2014. If this was simply a college basketball thing (with interest really starting in March), you’d see the same trends for all the networks, but that isn’t the case. Percentage-wise FS1 was the only network to not see a decline at some point.
ESPN ESPN2 ESPNU ESPNNews NBCSN FS1
Nov. to Dec. 18.8% 39.32% 16.34% -70.14% -50.6% 19.39%
Dec. to Jan. 1.47% -10.29% -1.39% 76.19% -38.75% 25.69%
Jan. to Feb. -3.76% -15.77% 0.07% -16.37% 94.62% 15.81%
Feb. to Mar. -1.15% 4.63% 15.47% 50.42% -23.4% 77.63%
Nov. to Mar. 14.68% 10.15% 32.58% -33.81% -54.9% 208.7%
So let’s try this again.With one season under the belt, how did those ratings turn out?
A slow start gave way to a roaring finish at FS1. Overall, a B+ on a curved scale.
So while it is true that FS1’s basketball ratings were weak overall in comparison to ESPN’s, the trend line is much more favorable to FS1 than pundits and ex-Big East coaches would have you believe. The big worry was that no one would watch the channel while the Big East, as well as the other leagues featured, would fade into irrelevance. The race has just begun, but that has already been disproved.
We haven’t even mentioned historical precedent, either. Take a second to let the biases you may hold for or against the network dissipate and look at the facts. FOX has had two extravagant ventures into TV land that have surpassed all expectations, wildly succeeding in every sense of the word.
For most my age, the”Big 4″ has always been ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX. But anyone over the age of 25 (as well as anyone with internet access and Wikipedia) can attest that this wasn’t always the case. FOX originated as a group of affiliates in the late 80s and morphed into a full-fledged network in 1994 after acquiring the rights to the NFL package. It’s been 20 years since then, but it is now one of the staples of broadcast television. Along similar lines, FOX News launched in 1996 and, whatever you may think of its politics or decisions, has become the most-watched news network on cable.
Long story short, feel free to dismiss FS1 at your leisure, but ask those who bet against News Corp. in the past how that turned out. FS1 may never topple ESPN from its perch, but to assume it will remain a blip in the ratings is foolish
vutomcat wrote:
The first thing that most analyses of the FS1 basketball ratings fail to acknowledge is the sheer breadth of coverage is bound to dilute the data. What does that mean? Having more nationally televised games will mean there are more clunkers with little audience interest being shown. Only diehards are going to tune in as Villanova takes on Towson at 5 p.m. on a Sunday.
Long story short, feel free to dismiss FS1 at your leisure, but ask those who bet against News Corp. in the past how that turned out. FS1 may never topple ESPN from its perch, but to assume it will remain a blip in the ratings is foolish
Wow, was that necessary?
I just left the two paragraphs above. I don't think anyone in their right mind would think that FS1 won't work as a long-term sports channel - heck, if NBC Sports is still around that tells you that anyone can do it. However, just because FS1 will work as a station doesn't mean that it will do so because of the New Big East basketball. There are still going to be way, way too many clunkers in the New Big East, just like there were in the innagural year after the powers in the Big East bolted. nova is still a national presence, but that's really it, and you have to question if nova will be able to withstand the rest of the conference pulling them back towards mediocrity.
The Big East is what it is - a second tier conference with a name of a conference that used to be first tier not too long ago. It's the A-10 with a better name. FS1 will succeed in spite of it.
vutomcat wrote:
The first thing that most analyses of the FS1 basketball ratings fail to acknowledge is the sheer breadth of coverage is bound to dilute the data. What does that mean? Having more nationally televised games will mean there are more clunkers with little audience interest being shown. Only diehards are going to tune in as Villanova takes on Towson at 5 p.m. on a Sunday.
Long story short, feel free to dismiss FS1 at your leisure, but ask those who bet against News Corp. in the past how that turned out. FS1 may never topple ESPN from its perch, but to assume it will remain a blip in the ratings is foolish
Wow, was that necessary?
I just left the two paragraphs above. I don't think anyone in their right mind would think that FS1 won't work as a long-term sports channel - heck, if NBC Sports is still around that tells you that anyone can do it. However, just because FS1 will work as a station doesn't mean that it will do so because of the New Big East basketball. There are still going to be way, way too many clunkers in the New Big East, just like there were in the innagural year after the powers in the Big East bolted. nova is still a national presence, but that's really it, and you have to question if nova will be able to withstand the rest of the conference pulling them back towards mediocrity.
The Big East is what it is - a second tier conference with a name of a conference that used to be first tier not too long ago. It's the A-10 with a better name. FS1 will succeed in spite of it.
Look, just admit the facts. they are what they are. The Big East TV ratings continued to improve while others didn't. And, the recruiting this past year was that of a premier conference. Nuff said. Move on.
I just left the two paragraphs above. I don't think anyone in their right mind would think that FS1 won't work as a long-term sports channel - heck, if NBC Sports is still around that tells you that anyone can do it. However, just because FS1 will work as a station doesn't mean that it will do so because of the New Big East basketball. There are still going to be way, way too many clunkers in the New Big East, just like there were in the innagural year after the powers in the Big East bolted. nova is still a national presence, but that's really it, and you have to question if nova will be able to withstand the rest of the conference pulling them back towards mediocrity.
The Big East is what it is - a second tier conference with a name of a conference that used to be first tier not too long ago. It's the A-10 with a better name. FS1 will succeed in spite of it.
Look, just admit the facts. they are what they are. The Big East TV ratings continued to improve while others didn't. And, the recruiting this past year was that of a premier conference. Nuff said. Move on.
Okay, facts.
Fact - total viewership on FS1 increased from November through February last year by 47,826 viewers (not sure why March is on there, most of the month didn't feature college basketball). During the same time period, viewers on EPSN increased 197,477. The only reason you and the article showed the % increase is because you're both rah-rah for FS1 and the Big East. When you start from a very tiny number, of course the % increase will be large. But it still ended up at a tiny number.
Fact - that article you posted is actually a very pro-FS1 piece and kinda an anti-Big East piece. Take this sentence...
The biggest factor, though, was the dearth of quality games. Of the 16 tilts broadcast on FS1, only four were between high-major teams.
If that's not a slam at the Big East then you're not paying attention. The article is saying what we've all been saying - there just aren't enough good teams in the new Big East to get enough quality matchups during the year.
Fact - The preseason AP poll has one New Big East team in it. You need to go all the way into the receiving votes category, and pretty deep into it (#43 in the country) to find the next Big East team listed in Georgetown. That means that, right now, nova won't face a team even in the top 40 anytime during conference play. How will that impact FS1 ratings for New Big East games?
Fact - In the same preseason AP poll, the New Big East has fewer teams in the top 25 than the ACC (the ACC has 5, including 2 former Big East teams), the Big 10 has 5, and the Big 12 has 4. That's what premier conferences look like.
Fact - Heck, the AAC, the other half of the Former Big East, has more teams (2) in the top 25 than the New Big East does, and has plenty of teams in the ARV section before you get to Georgetown. So Year 2 after the separation looks like to be just like Year 1 - the better basketball conference is the AAC, not the conference that kept the name.
Fact - The A10 has just as many teams in the top 25 as the New Big East does.
Hey, we get it, you're a nova guy and it's tough to stomach that nova doesn't play in a premeir conference anymore. But hey, Gonzaga has done alright and they play in a similar conference. Just think of yourselves as the East Coast version of the WCC. It could be worse.
act - total viewership on FS1 increased from November through February last year by 47,826 viewers (not sure why March is on there, most of the month didn't feature college basketball). During the same time period, viewers on EPSN increased 197,477. The only reason you and the article showed the % increase is because you're both rah-rah for FS1 and the Big East. When you start from a very tiny number, of course the % increase will be large. But it still ended up at a tiny number.
You forgot about March where it went up by 200%. That's just the first FACT that you wanted to share but failed to post the full story. Credibility my man, very low.
Look, I'm not comparing this Big East with the old Big East. But this Big East is still in so many ways superior to the A-10 or the West Coast conference that it is laughable for you to compare them. It has been posted here many times that the FS1 experiment was a flat out failure. I thought it might be worthwhile sharing, for those of you who are interested, how the numbers show that the Big East TV ratings were better than what was previousy written. If you just want to bash on a mid major thread , move over to the A-10 thread. Or, do you have some TV ratungs on the West Coast conference you want to share? Or, the A-10?
act - total viewership on FS1 increased from November through February last year by 47,826 viewers (not sure why March is on there, most of the month didn't feature college basketball). During the same time period, viewers on EPSN increased 197,477. The only reason you and the article showed the % increase is because you're both rah-rah for FS1 and the Big East. When you start from a very tiny number, of course the % increase will be large. But it still ended up at a tiny number.
You forgot about March where it went up by 200%. That's just the first FACT that you wanted to share but failed to post the full story. Credibility my man, very low.
Look, I'm not comparing this Big East with the old Big East. But this Big East is still in so many ways superior to the A-10 or the West Coast conference that it is laughable for you to compare them. It has been posted here many times that the FS1 experiment was a flat out failure. I thought it might be worthwhile sharing, for those of you who are interested, how the numbers show that the Big East TV ratings were better than what was previousy written. If you just want to bash on a mid major thread , move over to the A-10 thread. Or, do you have some TV ratungs on the West Coast conference you want to share? Or, the A-10?
I didn't forget March, I even said I'm not sure why March was included since for half the month FS1 didn't even show Big East basketball. Heck, maybe it was the absence of Big East basketball that allowed FS1 to show something else and get the quality ratings?
As for the New Big East, you're the one who's calling it a premier conference. So unless you refer to other conferences like the ACC and Big 10 as "super premier" (heck, it's starting to sound like kids travel sports with the terminology) then the Big East just simply isn't there. It's almost like what CUSA was when Memphis was still there, but after Cincy and others bolted to join the then Big East. It's one good team (nova) surrounded by a bunch of teams that could put together a once in a decade or two decades run, but generally are just mediocre basketball teams. Clenz did a good review on how Creighton's program was like that, and we have ample evidence on schools like St Johns and Providence and Seton Hall and the others that could put together a decent year every now and then, but are really aspiring to be even average basketball programs. That just ain't premier, unless you so bastardize the term that being premier is meaningless.
You may mock the A10 and WCC, but those conferences are going to continue to put more teams into the tourney every year. Eventually the tourney credits from the old Big East are going to expire and nova's going to find it hard to stay afloat while the programs around it try to drag them down. If the New Big East can't find an infusion of quality basketball programs that can annually compete, then the future is kinda bleak for a once great name.
GANNON FAN-"I didn't forget March, I even said I'm not sure why March was included since for half the month FS1 didn't even show Big East basketball. Heck, maybe it was the absence of Big East basketball that allowed FS1 to show something else and get the quality ratings?"
The ratings cited for March showing an average of 200,00 viewers per game were for basketball.
64,000 in November
77,000 in December
97,000 in January
112,000 in February
200,000 in March
You really should have read the article, it had some interesting trends to show. I think you are an A-10 mid major poster. Really, you should check that thread out and post there since it's such a great conference.
vutomcat wrote:GANNON FAN-"I didn't forget March, I even said I'm not sure why March was included since for half the month FS1 didn't even show Big East basketball. Heck, maybe it was the absence of Big East basketball that allowed FS1 to show something else and get the quality ratings?"
The ratings cited for March showing an average of 200,00 viewers per game were for basketball.
64,000 in November
77,000 in December
97,000 in January
112,000 in February
200,000 in March
You really should have read the article, it had some interesting trends to show. I think you are an A-10 mid major poster. Really, you should check that thread out and post there since it's such a great conference.
Did you read the article? Did you even open the spreadsheet they had with the data? Yes, 200,000 in March were the average viewers for just basketball. But not just Big East basketball, the Pac-12 was in there as well. And again, the biggest increase was during the Big East and Pac-12 tournaments, which FS1 carried. Let's look at the numbers:
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March prior to conference tournaments: 123,615 (i.e. not much bigger than Feb)
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March during the conference tournaments: 282,917 (boosted by the Big East title game and the Pac-12 title game both getting aroun 700k each)
So really, is the secret for high ratings on FS1 for Big East basketball is to have conference titles for each month this year? Why wait for March, let's have a November champion!
Oh, and just a real neat data point - the number of viewers for perhaps the Big East's premeir matchup in terms of names, Georgetown versus nova, on the eve of the Big East tournament, in March, on a weekend, when everyone's focus is on basketball - 74,000 viewers. That's it. Oh, competing against that game on ESPN was that storied matchup of Oklahoma St vs Iowa St. That game got 1,172,000 viewers. That's something like 1484% more viewers. It's amazing how those percents can be so big when you start with a tiny number!
vutomcat wrote:GANNON FAN-"I didn't forget March, I even said I'm not sure why March was included since for half the month FS1 didn't even show Big East basketball. Heck, maybe it was the absence of Big East basketball that allowed FS1 to show something else and get the quality ratings?"
The ratings cited for March showing an average of 200,00 viewers per game were for basketball.
64,000 in November
77,000 in December
97,000 in January
112,000 in February
200,000 in March
You really should have read the article, it had some interesting trends to show. I think you are an A-10 mid major poster. Really, you should check that thread out and post there since it's such a great conference.
Did you read the article? Did you even open the spreadsheet they had with the data? Yes, 200,000 in March were the average viewers for just basketball. But not just Big East basketball, the Pac-12 was in there as well. And again, the biggest increase was during the Big East and Pac-12 tournaments, which FS1 carried. Let's look at the numbers:
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March prior to conference tournaments: 123,615 (i.e. not much bigger than Feb)
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March during the conference tournaments: 282,917 (boosted by the Big East title game and the Pac-12 title game both getting aroun 700k each)
So really, is the secret for high ratings on FS1 for Big East basketball is to have conference titles for each month this year? Why wait for March, let's have a November champion!
Oh, and just a real neat data point - the number of viewers for perhaps the Big East's premeir matchup in terms of names, Georgetown versus nova, on the eve of the Big East tournament, in March, on a weekend, when everyone's focus is on basketball - 74,000 viewers. That's it. Oh, competing against that game on ESPN was that storied matchup of Oklahoma St vs Iowa St. That game got 1,172,000 viewers. That's something like 1484% more viewers. It's amazing how those percents can be so big when you start with a tiny number!
Here we go again.
"Did you read the article?"
YES, THE ENTIRE ARTICLE AND I UNDERSTOOD IT THE FIRST TIME I READ IT.
"Did you even open the spreadsheet they had with the data?"
YES, THAT’S HOW I KNEW THAT THE VIEWERSHIP INCREASES WERE FOR BASKETBALL AND YOU THOUGHT THEY WERE FOR FS1 AS A WHOLE. REMEMBER YOU POSTED HOW FUNNY IT WAS THAT THE NUMBERS INCREASED IN MARCH BECAUSE THERE WASN’T MUCH BASKETBALL?
"But not just Big East basketball, the Pac-12 was in there as well."
SO NOW THE NUMBERS WERE GOOD BUT IT”S BECAUSE OF THE HANDFUL OF PAC 12 GAMES?
And again, the biggest increase was during the Big East and Pac-12 tournaments, which FS1 carried. Let's look at the numbers: So really, is the secret for high ratings on FS1 for Big East basketball is to have conference titles for each month this year? Why wait for March, let's have a November champion!
NEWSFLASH! RATINGS ARE HIGHER DURING PLAYOFFS!
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March prior to conference tournaments: 123,615 (i.e. not much bigger than Feb)
BUT HIGHER NONETHELESS. THANKS FOR POINTING OUT THE CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT EVEN EXCLUDING THE PLAYOFFS.
GannonFan wrote:
Did you read the article? Did you even open the spreadsheet they had with the data? Yes, 200,000 in March were the average viewers for just basketball. But not just Big East basketball, the Pac-12 was in there as well. And again, the biggest increase was during the Big East and Pac-12 tournaments, which FS1 carried. Let's look at the numbers:
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March prior to conference tournaments: 123,615 (i.e. not much bigger than Feb)
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March during the conference tournaments: 282,917 (boosted by the Big East title game and the Pac-12 title game both getting aroun 700k each)
So really, is the secret for high ratings on FS1 for Big East basketball is to have conference titles for each month this year? Why wait for March, let's have a November champion!
Oh, and just a real neat data point - the number of viewers for perhaps the Big East's premeir matchup in terms of names, Georgetown versus nova, on the eve of the Big East tournament, in March, on a weekend, when everyone's focus is on basketball - 74,000 viewers. That's it. Oh, competing against that game on ESPN was that storied matchup of Oklahoma St vs Iowa St. That game got 1,172,000 viewers. That's something like 1484% more viewers. It's amazing how those percents can be so big when you start with a tiny number!
Here we go again.
"Did you read the article?"
YES, THE ENTIRE ARTICLE AND I UNDERSTOOD IT THE FIRST TIME I READ IT.
"Did you even open the spreadsheet they had with the data?"
YES, THAT’S HOW I KNEW THAT THE VIEWERSHIP INCREASES WERE FOR BASKETBALL AND YOU THOUGHT THEY WERE FOR FS1 AS A WHOLE. REMEMBER YOU POSTED HOW FUNNY IT WAS THAT THE NUMBERS INCREASED IN MARCH BECAUSE THERE WASN’T MUCH BASKETBALL?
"But not just Big East basketball, the Pac-12 was in there as well."
SO NOW THE NUMBERS WERE GOOD BUT IT”S BECAUSE OF THE HANDFUL OF PAC 12 GAMES?
And again, the biggest increase was during the Big East and Pac-12 tournaments, which FS1 carried. Let's look at the numbers: So really, is the secret for high ratings on FS1 for Big East basketball is to have conference titles for each month this year? Why wait for March, let's have a November champion!
NEWSFLASH! RATINGS ARE HIGHER DURING PLAYOFFS!
FS1 avg viewers for basketball in March prior to conference tournaments: 123,615 (i.e. not much bigger than Feb)
BUT HIGHER NONETHELESS. THANKS FOR POINTING OUT THE CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT EVEN EXCLUDING THE PLAYOFFS.
So, no comment on nova/Georgetown getting crickets in terms of TV ratings while Big 12 basketball thumped it straight up? And the New Big East is still a "premier conference"? Your ability to avoid that discussion is truly remarkable.
If you read and understood the article, you would know that simply comparing ESPN bball game viewership numbers with FS1 bball game viewership numbers doesn't make sense.
vutomcat wrote:If you read and understood the article, you would know that simply comparing ESPN bball game viewership numbers with FS1 bball game viewership numbers doesn't make sense.
It was March, supposedly people had found the station by then. Heck, they found it a week later when the Big East tournament started. Why wasn't there a rush to find it with nova/G-town being played, supposedly the signature game for the New Big East? And heck, why even compare to ESPN - compare it to previous games on FS1 which pulled in at least twice the audience that game did.
vutomcat wrote:If you read and understood the article, you would know that simply comparing ESPN bball game viewership numbers with FS1 bball game viewership numbers doesn't make sense.
It was March, supposedly people had found the station by then. Heck, they found it a week later when the Big East tournament started. Why wasn't there a rush to find it with nova/G-town being played, supposedly the signature game for the New Big East? And heck, why even compare to ESPN - compare it to previous games on FS1 which pulled in at least twice the audience that game did.
GannonFan wrote:
It was March, supposedly people had found the station by then. Heck, they found it a week later when the Big East tournament started. Why wasn't there a rush to find it with nova/G-town being played, supposedly the signature game for the New Big East? And heck, why even compare to ESPN - compare it to previous games on FS1 which pulled in at least twice the audience that game did.
uhh because Gtown sucked?
I don't disagree with that, but the problem is you could say that about a lot of New Big East teams last year and even this year and likely the years ahead. That's the fundamental problem with the New Big East, just not enough good teams. Right now they have one - nova. After that, not a whole lot else.
I don't disagree with that, but the problem is you could say that about a lot of New Big East teams last year and even this year and likely the years ahead. That's the fundamental problem with the New Big East, just not enough good teams. Right now they have one - nova. After that, not a whole lot else.
You might get a better barometer this year when they play again since Gtown is projected to be the second best team in the league. Assuming both teams live up to their potential, we can have this discussion again after the game.
GannonFan wrote:
I don't disagree with that, but the problem is you could say that about a lot of New Big East teams last year and even this year and likely the years ahead. That's the fundamental problem with the New Big East, just not enough good teams. Right now they have one - nova. After that, not a whole lot else.
You might get a better barometer this year when they play again since Gtown is projected to be the second best team in the league. Assuming both teams live up to their potential, we can have this discussion again after the game.
Believe me, considering on how poorly most of the New Big East sans nova is predicted to be this year, I can assure you we will be having this discussion througout the year.
bluehenbillk wrote:Nova looked really good in the last 17 minutes of that game last night - blew the Rams off the floor.
It is nice when VCU loses. That game two years ago in the tourney when they got smoked by Michigan was a joy to watch. Never liked that style of basketball. Very Cincinnati-like back in the Van Excel days - foul early and foul often and hope the refs get tired of blowing the whistle.
