Jump to content

LTbear

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2418
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LTbear

  1. I got curious and looked it up. Between 1960 - 1993 TCU had four seasons of 6+ wins. It was bad. To their credit, they used being left out of the original Big XII as a real call to action and completely revitalized that program over the following decade.
  2. Not at the time. TCU was on a multi-decade run of absolutely awful football back then and had horrible attendance/ interest. As a football program, Baylor was clearly better, they just immediately went into a nosedive once the Big XII started play/ after Teaff retired.
  3. Just for the sake of accuracy, Ann gave no fucks and didn't do shit; that's just a refuses-to-die internet myth because it sounds so obvious. Bob Bullock was the politician who led the charge for Baylor and Tech.
  4. All of ND's "shamrock series" uniforms have been awful
  5. For that matter, Texas also has some of the best remaining habitat for Mexican wolf reintroduction, but it will never get off the ground. Texas has also had two separate additional national parks suggested and studied by the NPS - one at Palo Duro, one in the Davis Mountains - but both times the federal gubmnt has been run outta town for being tree huggers and animal lovers.
  6. Ya, Texas is generally an absolute embarrassment when it comes to conservation. I believe we've been the only state to not have hunting regulations (seasons and bag limits) on mountain lions for, at minimum, a couple decades. Probably more.
  7. I spent five years at Cal doing my PhD. Love the institution. Went to many a football game. And yet I can say they bring nothing athletically. Their best shot is to argue future potential and ride the academic prestige wave.
  8. I think the point is how well do PAC and Big XII teams do when all is equal. Because if, in theory, the PAC is just advantaged by having some late timeslots while the Big XII does better otherwise, then adding a few PAC teams to the Big XII would consolidate some of those uncontested timeslots with overall better ratings.
  9. Adding to this, I think the B12 puts one game per team per year (usually the crappiest non-con) on ESPN+ or LHN, the P12 airs 35 games on the P12 network out of their 144 total game inventory, so he's discarding the bottom 25% of the lowest ratings from their averages.
  10. Man, I just realized one other obvious bias that Mandel admits himself: the PAC's late-night game skews their average because they're up against no competition. So his numbers are already including many more (by %) low-rating Big XII games than Pac games, but he's also skewing Pac numbers with an uncontested timeslot that would (obviously) go to the Big XII if the Big XII were to absorb some Pac members. And: 45% or so of the Big 12's games he sampled were on FS1 or ESPNU. 28% for the PAC. 49% of the PAC was on ABC/ESPN/FOX. 22% for the Big 12. (last bit from external source, not my math)
  11. Seeing as Mandel's numbers only use half of Big XII games, then for this "analysis"/ the convo at hand that you're replying to, likely no.
  12. This exactly. Doing a true apples to apples comparison is possible, and I actually have no idea how it might come out, but it definitely takes a lot more work than what Mandel put in. He did only the most basic, shallow-level "correction;" enough to make the general reader say "oh gee golly this is really well thought out" but not nearly enough for anyone with a mind towards stats and potential statistical biases.
  13. To be fair, Wilner and Mandel are absolutely homers. Wilner makes a career covering PAC sports, and Mandel does the same in large part. Other writers, including others from The Athletic, are much more unbiased. Like I said, Mandel's quick "analyses" are a good starting point, but someone like me who just happens to have dealt with stats a good bit immediately recognized some sources of bias in his breakdown. Taking out UT, OU, USC and UCLA is obviously a good move, but you also have to compare the same quality and depth of game across both conferences to have an apples to apples comparison. You could take other data like this and quickly calculate that the Big 12 - OU/ UT gets more views than the PAC - USC/ UCLA. (No, that's not a great analysis at all, but just as an example).
  14. No idea why now, but for years I had thought you were a Colorado fan.
  15. Ah I missed this. It might get roughly at what I was wondering about. Like it would roughly be considering the top 38% or so of PAC games and the top 55% or so of Big XII games.
  16. Good summary, but I'm curious about one aspect of the way he sets up the analysis. He always throws out 2020, if I remember correctly, which is the right call. He also says he doesn't include ESPN+ that started carrying a few lousy Big XII games in 2019 and 2021, but he's not including PACN games for any of the years studied, which carried a good number of lousy Pac games. As such I wonder if his numbers are biased towards including more of the "upper" Pac 12 games while mostly including all of the Big XII "lower" games, because 1) The PACN carries more games throughout the study period due to better setup and more teams/ inventory, and 2) ESPN+ carried fewer game and didn't begin until the last two years of the study period. /nerd data rant over
  17. It has been foretold
  18. I would have fun watching Boise in the PAC.
  19. "The ability to provide 10:30ET games," just like I have the ability to provide Scarlett Johansen with 15 of the most okay seconds of her life.
  20. Not sure if already mentioned, but Colorado has scheduled yet another emergency regents meeting on "PAC 12 contracts" for tomorrow.
  21. 1. Better than their normal helmet 2. Shame they decided to give their fans seizures with that little hype vid
  22. $33M per school was the PAC's total revenue distribution. MHVer is saying $25M per school in TV contracts, which might still mean above $33M per school total. But MHVer is probably full of shit.
×
×
  • Create New...