Three Wins from a ticket to the dance
- Thread starter beast of the east
- Start date
The major media market impact does not need to be CBS specifically wanting to favor certain teams or markets. It can just be a matter of exposure. The ability of seeing a specific team multiple times on national tv, or seeing a lot of articles on how well they are playing or a big winning streak can impact the perception of a team. A Big Sky commissioner may not see too many Big East games...but what if he happened to see the two Sunday night games against Creighton and Georgetown because (a) there aren't many other Sunday night games and (b) the games were on National TV. We would certainly pass the eye test for this comittee member. There doesn't necessarilly have to be criteria or conspiracies favoring teams with win streaks or from major markets. There will be tangible benefits in terms of image and exposure regardless. It is also why wins against ranked teams are so big. They get talked about. Highlights are played on ESPN. Articles are written. The exposure from a win against the 25th ranked team is much much more than a win against the 26th team (top vote getter not in top 25). Think about how many people probably saw the Jordan windmill dunk at the end of the Georgetown game...who may now know that we blew them out just because of the highlight dunk that otherwise meant nothing to the outcome of that particular game.
postell25
Member
I agree that the eyeball test does come in to play some and we do pass that test with our recent play. But it doesn't matter where these committee members are from, if they are on the committee, they are well prepared and well versed in every team. The committee meets in Indianapolis a few time a year to discuss things. I read last year that each member of the committee takes in over 100 games a year in person all across the country and that the tournament selection is something the members take very seriously.
The committee does not look at the AP Top 25 rankings at all.
No new line is needed.And ask Gina from Brooklyn or Joe from Jersey City, or Jack from Los Angeles, all of whom are non college basketball fans if they are watching Monday nights Kansas/Creighton game. The answer would be, what is a Creighton. Now....ask Gina if she knows what St. John's is.....and will she watch this one college basketball game in her lifetime....the answer is yes.Let's put it another way.Nothing to do with managing expectations. It has eveything to do with just enjoying this run. They don't come around often, and maybe this team has a chance to have that "special" run. Lesser talented teams have done it. Maybe a few drinks will help you do that.
It seems someone around here needs to manage your guys' expectations
And at holiday parties I get more affable by the beer.
I'm thoroughly enjoying this run but that's not what this thread was about. If there is a thread called "Who else is enjoying this run" then I'll post something about how I am. But this is about their tournament chances and it seem like a lot of people are wearing their Big Apple Rimmed Red Lens Glasses regarding their tournament profile and the effect New York has on getting them in. The NCAA tournament has been doing just fine with or without St. John's. It's probably the most valuable TV real estate outside the NFL. Who ever the committee thinks should be in the tournament will be in the tournament. The teams who drive TV ratings are already locks for the tournament.
Why did the Big 10 accept Rutgers as a member? A bottom feeder in basketball. A team that will be a bottom feeder in football for at least the next 5 years?
It was the thought of $$$$$$$(see, I used a bunch of them) signs. They think (and pray) that Rutgers will bring the NY (and Philly) markets into play for the Big 10 Network. Increased ratings....increased ad revenue rates....more money for the member institutions.
The NCAA does the same thing on a larger scale with basketball. Sure...they want the national powers such as Duke, NC, Kansas in the tourney year after year. But what gets them excited? A St.John's vs UCLA Monday Night Championship game. Every single NCAA TV rating record would be broken if that matchup ever came into being. With that....more revenue for the following year.
I'm sorry but you are way off base with that whole post.
Comparing a college football conference to the NCAA Tournament is like comparing apples and oranges. Everything you said about Rutgers to the Big Ten is true but it's not applicable here. The NCAA Tournament is a monster. In college basketball it's not the teams or markets that make for highly rated games, it's the players and coaches. If it was a St. John's/UCLA final CBS would be worried. There is no players on either team to market to America. Maybe St. John's would pique the interest of the casual fan because as a probably 11 seed they'd be an underdog story but it would have nothing to do with "New York's Own St. John's!!!" Go ask 100 casual college basketball fans West of the Mississippi to name a player on St. John's and I bet a majority of them can't name one. A Kansas/Creighton final would have more juice nationally because the game can be marketed around Wiggins/Embiid and McDermott or a Louisville/Duke final with Pitino and Coach K.
There are a lot more non-basketball fans out there than casual basketball fans.
To argue that CBS for a championship game would rather have the Lawrence, Kansas and Omaha, Nebraska markets in play, rather than the NY and Los Angeles markets....is simply nuts. (No offense).
You are way too hung up on markets. Last year an average of 23.4 million viewers watched the National Championship games and the teams were from Kentucky and Ohio. It was the highest rated tournament in 23 years and there was nary a New York City team to be found. The tournament final had twice the viewers of the World Series. The event is market proof or CBS and Turner wouldn't have spent so much on it. The only thing that lower ratings to a game like that is not having marquee PLAYERS OR COACHES and even still it's going to be watched by over 20 million.
You're going to need a new line of defense.
A record number of people viewed the game last year. What does that have to do with the markets? Can you not understand that by having hometown teams playing in the game from the 2 largest markets, there will be increased viewership? Can you understand how with the scenario that I described, perhaps 27 million viewers will tune in....simply because you are attracting from a larger and deeper pool?
Having compelling players and coaches are nice. This gets you the core fans and the casual fan. Do you not think that for 2 weeks CBS would not market Lavin? Or for the week leading up to the Final 4 promote a Lavin vs UCLA angle? All of which will bring in the non basketball fan. Of which there are tens of millions in NY and LA combined.
The mayor of NY and the mayor of LA make a bet on the game. Folks in their respective cities care about it. Combined, there are about 50 million people in their geographic areas.
The mayor of Lawrence and the mayor of Omaha make a bet on the game. Folks in their respective cities care about it. Combined, maybe 1 million people in their geographic areas. (I'm guessing).
Now...you are a TV exec. Which teams would you rather have in the game? McDemott/Wiggins and 1 million? Or Lavin/UCLA history and 50 million?
Pass the popcorn...can't wait for this answer!
I'll sarcastically tell you that you are right to placate you and move on since I did get caught up in your ridiculousness and missed a major issue with your argument. Where on this list below is Les Moonves, Sean McManus or David Berson?
Mike Bobinski Georgia Tech Athletic Director
Ron Wellman Wake Forest University Athletic Director
Doug Fullerton Big Sky Conference Commissioner
Scott Barnes Utah State University Athletic Director
Steve Orsini Former Southern Methodist University Athletic Director
Joe Alleva LSU Director of Athletics
Jamie Zaninovich West Coast Conference Commissioner
Joe Castiglione University of Oklahoma Athletic Director
Bernard Muir Stanford University Athletic Director
Mark Hollis Michigan State University Athletic Director
That's right. Nowhere. Somehow you seem to think CBS even has a say who makes the tournament. So one way or another TV market is irrelevant.
I'll answer your question in a second, however you conveniently neglected to answer mine. So, I'll ask it again. Let's play TV Executive. You are Les Moonves. Your choices are: 50 million potential viewers in one set of markets vs 1 million in another set of markets. Which would you rather have as a potential viewing source?
If your answer is 1 million...with the attraction of a Kansas vs Creighton game....as a stockholder of CBS, I want you nowhere near the helm of my company!
Thanks for listing the members of the committee. Of course there will not be a TV executive on the comittee. The NCAA OWNS the product!
Now....ask yourself this question....how are revenues from television divided among NCAA institutions? As the revenue stream increases...does the NCAA profit?
Actually, please....don't bother to answer. I'm getting a headache just arguing this point with you.
I really have no time to continue this discussion as we just will simply have to agree to disagree here.
postell25
Member
No new line is needed.And ask Gina from Brooklyn or Joe from Jersey City, or Jack from Los Angeles, all of whom are non college basketball fans if they are watching Monday nights Kansas/Creighton game. The answer would be, what is a Creighton. Now....ask Gina if she knows what St. John's is.....and will she watch this one college basketball game in her lifetime....the answer is yes.Let's put it another way.Nothing to do with managing expectations. It has eveything to do with just enjoying this run. They don't come around often, and maybe this team has a chance to have that "special" run. Lesser talented teams have done it. Maybe a few drinks will help you do that.
It seems someone around here needs to manage your guys' expectations
And at holiday parties I get more affable by the beer.
I'm thoroughly enjoying this run but that's not what this thread was about. If there is a thread called "Who else is enjoying this run" then I'll post something about how I am. But this is about their tournament chances and it seem like a lot of people are wearing their Big Apple Rimmed Red Lens Glasses regarding their tournament profile and the effect New York has on getting them in. The NCAA tournament has been doing just fine with or without St. John's. It's probably the most valuable TV real estate outside the NFL. Who ever the committee thinks should be in the tournament will be in the tournament. The teams who drive TV ratings are already locks for the tournament.
Why did the Big 10 accept Rutgers as a member? A bottom feeder in basketball. A team that will be a bottom feeder in football for at least the next 5 years?
It was the thought of $$$$$$$(see, I used a bunch of them) signs. They think (and pray) that Rutgers will bring the NY (and Philly) markets into play for the Big 10 Network. Increased ratings....increased ad revenue rates....more money for the member institutions.
The NCAA does the same thing on a larger scale with basketball. Sure...they want the national powers such as Duke, NC, Kansas in the tourney year after year. But what gets them excited? A St.John's vs UCLA Monday Night Championship game. Every single NCAA TV rating record would be broken if that matchup ever came into being. With that....more revenue for the following year.
I'm sorry but you are way off base with that whole post.
Comparing a college football conference to the NCAA Tournament is like comparing apples and oranges. Everything you said about Rutgers to the Big Ten is true but it's not applicable here. The NCAA Tournament is a monster. In college basketball it's not the teams or markets that make for highly rated games, it's the players and coaches. If it was a St. John's/UCLA final CBS would be worried. There is no players on either team to market to America. Maybe St. John's would pique the interest of the casual fan because as a probably 11 seed they'd be an underdog story but it would have nothing to do with "New York's Own St. John's!!!" Go ask 100 casual college basketball fans West of the Mississippi to name a player on St. John's and I bet a majority of them can't name one. A Kansas/Creighton final would have more juice nationally because the game can be marketed around Wiggins/Embiid and McDermott or a Louisville/Duke final with Pitino and Coach K.
There are a lot more non-basketball fans out there than casual basketball fans.
To argue that CBS for a championship game would rather have the Lawrence, Kansas and Omaha, Nebraska markets in play, rather than the NY and Los Angeles markets....is simply nuts. (No offense).
You are way too hung up on markets. Last year an average of 23.4 million viewers watched the National Championship games and the teams were from Kentucky and Ohio. It was the highest rated tournament in 23 years and there was nary a New York City team to be found. The tournament final had twice the viewers of the World Series. The event is market proof or CBS and Turner wouldn't have spent so much on it. The only thing that lower ratings to a game like that is not having marquee PLAYERS OR COACHES and even still it's going to be watched by over 20 million.
You're going to need a new line of defense.
A record number of people viewed the game last year. What does that have to do with the markets? Can you not understand that by having hometown teams playing in the game from the 2 largest markets, there will be increased viewership? Can you understand how with the scenario that I described, perhaps 27 million viewers will tune in....simply because you are attracting from a larger and deeper pool?
Having compelling players and coaches are nice. This gets you the core fans and the casual fan. Do you not think that for 2 weeks CBS would not market Lavin? Or for the week leading up to the Final 4 promote a Lavin vs UCLA angle? All of which will bring in the non basketball fan. Of which there are tens of millions in NY and LA combined.
The mayor of NY and the mayor of LA make a bet on the game. Folks in their respective cities care about it. Combined, there are about 50 million people in their geographic areas.
The mayor of Lawrence and the mayor of Omaha make a bet on the game. Folks in their respective cities care about it. Combined, maybe 1 million people in their geographic areas. (I'm guessing).
Now...you are a TV exec. Which teams would you rather have in the game? McDemott/Wiggins and 1 million? Or Lavin/UCLA history and 50 million?
Pass the popcorn...can't wait for this answer!
I'll sarcastically tell you that you are right to placate you and move on since I did get caught up in your ridiculousness and missed a major issue with your argument. Where on this list below is Les Moonves, Sean McManus or David Berson?
Mike Bobinski Georgia Tech Athletic Director
Ron Wellman Wake Forest University Athletic Director
Doug Fullerton Big Sky Conference Commissioner
Scott Barnes Utah State University Athletic Director
Steve Orsini Former Southern Methodist University Athletic Director
Joe Alleva LSU Director of Athletics
Jamie Zaninovich West Coast Conference Commissioner
Joe Castiglione University of Oklahoma Athletic Director
Bernard Muir Stanford University Athletic Director
Mark Hollis Michigan State University Athletic Director
That's right. Nowhere. Somehow you seem to think CBS even has a say who makes the tournament. So one way or another TV market is irrelevant.
I'll answer your question in a second, however you conveniently neglected to answer mine. So, I'll ask it again. Let's play TV Executive. You are Les Moonves. Your choices are: 50 million potential viewers in one set of markets vs 1 million in another set of markets. Which would you rather have as a potential viewing source?
If your answer is 1 million...with the attraction of a Kansas vs Creighton game....as a stockholder of CBS, I want you nowhere near the helm of my company!
Thanks for listing the members of the committee. Of course there will not be a TV executive on the comittee. The NCAA OWNS the product!
Now....ask yourself this question....how are revenues from television divided among NCAA institutions? As the revenue stream increases...does the NCAA profit?
Actually, please....don't bother to answer. I'm getting a headache just arguing this point with you.
I really have no time to continue this discussion as we just will simply have to agree to disagree here.
I get what you're saying but I really believe that the NCAA selection committee doesn't take that in to account. They can't. It's too much guesswork on what will actually happen when the games are played. Everyone is going to watch the first weekend regardless of who is in it.
Fair enough. Now let's win the whole thing and put my theory to the test!No new line is needed.And ask Gina from Brooklyn or Joe from Jersey City, or Jack from Los Angeles, all of whom are non college basketball fans if they are watching Monday nights Kansas/Creighton game. The answer would be, what is a Creighton. Now....ask Gina if she knows what St. John's is.....and will she watch this one college basketball game in her lifetime....the answer is yes.Let's put it another way.Nothing to do with managing expectations. It has eveything to do with just enjoying this run. They don't come around often, and maybe this team has a chance to have that "special" run. Lesser talented teams have done it. Maybe a few drinks will help you do that.
It seems someone around here needs to manage your guys' expectations
And at holiday parties I get more affable by the beer.
I'm thoroughly enjoying this run but that's not what this thread was about. If there is a thread called "Who else is enjoying this run" then I'll post something about how I am. But this is about their tournament chances and it seem like a lot of people are wearing their Big Apple Rimmed Red Lens Glasses regarding their tournament profile and the effect New York has on getting them in. The NCAA tournament has been doing just fine with or without St. John's. It's probably the most valuable TV real estate outside the NFL. Who ever the committee thinks should be in the tournament will be in the tournament. The teams who drive TV ratings are already locks for the tournament.
Why did the Big 10 accept Rutgers as a member? A bottom feeder in basketball. A team that will be a bottom feeder in football for at least the next 5 years?
It was the thought of $$$$$$$(see, I used a bunch of them) signs. They think (and pray) that Rutgers will bring the NY (and Philly) markets into play for the Big 10 Network. Increased ratings....increased ad revenue rates....more money for the member institutions.
The NCAA does the same thing on a larger scale with basketball. Sure...they want the national powers such as Duke, NC, Kansas in the tourney year after year. But what gets them excited? A St.John's vs UCLA Monday Night Championship game. Every single NCAA TV rating record would be broken if that matchup ever came into being. With that....more revenue for the following year.
I'm sorry but you are way off base with that whole post.
Comparing a college football conference to the NCAA Tournament is like comparing apples and oranges. Everything you said about Rutgers to the Big Ten is true but it's not applicable here. The NCAA Tournament is a monster. In college basketball it's not the teams or markets that make for highly rated games, it's the players and coaches. If it was a St. John's/UCLA final CBS would be worried. There is no players on either team to market to America. Maybe St. John's would pique the interest of the casual fan because as a probably 11 seed they'd be an underdog story but it would have nothing to do with "New York's Own St. John's!!!" Go ask 100 casual college basketball fans West of the Mississippi to name a player on St. John's and I bet a majority of them can't name one. A Kansas/Creighton final would have more juice nationally because the game can be marketed around Wiggins/Embiid and McDermott or a Louisville/Duke final with Pitino and Coach K.
There are a lot more non-basketball fans out there than casual basketball fans.
To argue that CBS for a championship game would rather have the Lawrence, Kansas and Omaha, Nebraska markets in play, rather than the NY and Los Angeles markets....is simply nuts. (No offense).
You are way too hung up on markets. Last year an average of 23.4 million viewers watched the National Championship games and the teams were from Kentucky and Ohio. It was the highest rated tournament in 23 years and there was nary a New York City team to be found. The tournament final had twice the viewers of the World Series. The event is market proof or CBS and Turner wouldn't have spent so much on it. The only thing that lower ratings to a game like that is not having marquee PLAYERS OR COACHES and even still it's going to be watched by over 20 million.
You're going to need a new line of defense.
A record number of people viewed the game last year. What does that have to do with the markets? Can you not understand that by having hometown teams playing in the game from the 2 largest markets, there will be increased viewership? Can you understand how with the scenario that I described, perhaps 27 million viewers will tune in....simply because you are attracting from a larger and deeper pool?
Having compelling players and coaches are nice. This gets you the core fans and the casual fan. Do you not think that for 2 weeks CBS would not market Lavin? Or for the week leading up to the Final 4 promote a Lavin vs UCLA angle? All of which will bring in the non basketball fan. Of which there are tens of millions in NY and LA combined.
The mayor of NY and the mayor of LA make a bet on the game. Folks in their respective cities care about it. Combined, there are about 50 million people in their geographic areas.
The mayor of Lawrence and the mayor of Omaha make a bet on the game. Folks in their respective cities care about it. Combined, maybe 1 million people in their geographic areas. (I'm guessing).
Now...you are a TV exec. Which teams would you rather have in the game? McDemott/Wiggins and 1 million? Or Lavin/UCLA history and 50 million?
Pass the popcorn...can't wait for this answer!
I'll sarcastically tell you that you are right to placate you and move on since I did get caught up in your ridiculousness and missed a major issue with your argument. Where on this list below is Les Moonves, Sean McManus or David Berson?
Mike Bobinski Georgia Tech Athletic Director
Ron Wellman Wake Forest University Athletic Director
Doug Fullerton Big Sky Conference Commissioner
Scott Barnes Utah State University Athletic Director
Steve Orsini Former Southern Methodist University Athletic Director
Joe Alleva LSU Director of Athletics
Jamie Zaninovich West Coast Conference Commissioner
Joe Castiglione University of Oklahoma Athletic Director
Bernard Muir Stanford University Athletic Director
Mark Hollis Michigan State University Athletic Director
That's right. Nowhere. Somehow you seem to think CBS even has a say who makes the tournament. So one way or another TV market is irrelevant.
I'll answer your question in a second, however you conveniently neglected to answer mine. So, I'll ask it again. Let's play TV Executive. You are Les Moonves. Your choices are: 50 million potential viewers in one set of markets vs 1 million in another set of markets. Which would you rather have as a potential viewing source?
If your answer is 1 million...with the attraction of a Kansas vs Creighton game....as a stockholder of CBS, I want you nowhere near the helm of my company!
Thanks for listing the members of the committee. Of course there will not be a TV executive on the comittee. The NCAA OWNS the product!
Now....ask yourself this question....how are revenues from television divided among NCAA institutions? As the revenue stream increases...does the NCAA profit?
Actually, please....don't bother to answer. I'm getting a headache just arguing this point with you.
I really have no time to continue this discussion as we just will simply have to agree to disagree here.
I get what you're saying but I really believe that the NCAA selection committee doesn't take that in to account. They can't. It's too much guesswork on what will actually happen when the games are played. Everyone is going to watch the first weekend regardless of who is in it.
I didn't say that the committee looks at the AP Top 25 rankings. It's the positive media coverage (exposure) from beating a top 25 team will make an impression on committee members. There is a much higher potential to make a positive impression on a committee member by beating a team with a number next to it than there is from beating a team that is in the "others receiving votes" category even if there is little difference in the quality of those two teams. One of the main reasons for this is the media coverage that accompanies beating a ranked team. The same thing happens by beating a blue blood. There would be a lot more coverage of a win against Kentucky than there would be of a win against St.Louis...even though those teams probably have pretty similar resumes. (St.Louis probably has the better one)
I don't see a lot of friendly positions on that selection committee. It seems like there are a ton of midwest and west coast representatives. No Big East rep, but there is one for the Pac12, Big 12, ACC, SEC, AAC, and Big Ten. Ouch. Our best bet might be the WCC Commish. Wasn't he a potential target for Big East commish?
There are only two east coast reps, both are from the ACC. Not a single NE conference or school is represented. Only three reps from smaller conferences. I don't expect this committee to do the Big East any favors.
There are only two east coast reps, both are from the ACC. Not a single NE conference or school is represented. Only three reps from smaller conferences. I don't expect this committee to do the Big East any favors.
beast of the east
Active member
It makes you wonder if the selection committee would be comfortable handing out only 1 at large bid to the NCAA tourney (in addition to the one guaranteed slot), as opposed to the 4 at large bids Lavin is lobbying for. If they gave 1/2 of our conference bids, what would the committee (with ACC members) then do for the superior ACC with 15 teams? 7?8? 9?
Maybe what Lavin is really saying is, "You'd better not give the Big East one at large bid - you'd better come up with 2 or 3"
Reason for concern for certain.
postell25
Member
From Today's Bubble Watch:
St. John's [18-9 (8-6), RPI: 53, SOS: 45] The Red Storm drilled Georgetown and Butler this week, their fifth and sixth consecutive victories, respectively, and all of a sudden, this team we left for dead two weeks ago is right in the thick of things with the Tennessees, Minnesotas and Missouris of the world. That means there is still much work to do, of course. St. John's' RPI and schedule numbers are thoroughly mediocre. Saturday's trip to Villanova is a long shot, but the way this team is playing right now? Stay tuned.
St. John's [18-9 (8-6), RPI: 53, SOS: 45] The Red Storm drilled Georgetown and Butler this week, their fifth and sixth consecutive victories, respectively, and all of a sudden, this team we left for dead two weeks ago is right in the thick of things with the Tennessees, Minnesotas and Missouris of the world. That means there is still much work to do, of course. St. John's' RPI and schedule numbers are thoroughly mediocre. Saturday's trip to Villanova is a long shot, but the way this team is playing right now? Stay tuned.
If your in the SEC, and don't have wins against Florida or Kentucky, you shouldn't even be considered. Ole miss is a decent team though. I still am pissed we didn't get a chance to play them.
tom in salem
Well-known member
If they don't dance, Penn St, DePaul and Providence are the reasons.
Team should have had 20 wins a while ago.
Team should have had 20 wins a while ago.
beast of the east
Active member
Seasons do have ebbs and flows, and you always want the games back when you played horribly. No doubt DePaul and Providence could come back to hurt them, but I don't know that we played any better today than in either of those games. A win today, and they would have for the first time appeared to be a tourney team. Now they have to win three straight, which they can do, but it wont be as easy having to win at Marquette with everything on the line.
tom in salem
Well-known member
Played any better?
Are you serious?
Do you remember the name Hooper?
beast of the east
Active member
Hey Tom, hooper in the Providence game boiled down to one play with 20 seconds to go that took all of 3-4 seconds to complete. Today we shot horribly, and looked little like the team that had won 9 of 10. This wasn't a reprise of Duke-Syracuse by an y means.
westchesterjoe
Active member
I thought we played as poorly today as we did in the early part of the season. We stood around a lot and watched and let Nova control the game throughout. We are a poor half court team and again, today, proved it.
And, our amazing athletes can't guard spit on the perimeter. Anyone who thinks Pointer is a good defender isn't watching. He waves a lot as they blow by..
The Pointer lapse cost us about 6 points.. His missed dunk, freethrows and nova ball.
Why Lavin relies on DOM is a mystery. He's been awful the 2nd half of the season.
And, our amazing athletes can't guard spit on the perimeter. Anyone who thinks Pointer is a good defender isn't watching. He waves a lot as they blow by..
The Pointer lapse cost us about 6 points.. His missed dunk, freethrows and nova ball.
Why Lavin relies on DOM is a mystery. He's been awful the 2nd half of the season.