USF Media Market

[Triple B]

Sorry, even zooming in as much as possible, I do not believe in USF's own zip code they have less than 6% support. Simply false, no further debate needed. 

 

Was there a breakdown by zip codes for Hillsborough County that I missed?

[Guest]

 

For what it's worth... social media interaction is a fairly good representation of the broader audience.  Statistically speaking, there are enough Facebook members in every zip code to provide some level of predictability.

 

Although I am willing to bet USF was completely excluded from the overall study... there is no way USF is not in the top three teams in the zipcodes right around USF (33620, 33612, 33613, etc).

 

The New York Times should have looked at all 126 FBS teams... not just 82 of them.

Nobody was excluded from this ridiculous survey. They listed the top three teams that had "Likes" from either a zip code in some states or counties in others, like Florida. If you were #1 out of the 3 in any of those areas, zip code or county, you were considered part of the 82.

 

 

I find it hard to believe that the University of Florida would be #1 in 33620, if they were looking for USF.  My guess is they started with a list of teams and then looked for likes, not the other way around.

 

 

 

In our defense, UF and FSU have strong alumni associations in Hillsborough and Pinellas counties...I didn't know Miami had fans.

 

What's funny is that UM wasn't 3rd in Pinellas, Ohio State was ... and they were 3rd in every coastal county from Pasco down through Charlotte ... Lots of freaking snowbirds on Facebook.

 

 

 

Sorry, even zooming in as much as possible, I do not believe in USF's own zip code they have less than 6% support. Simply false, no further debate needed. 

 

It is quite obvious they only tested 82 teams... a few years ago, a different poll was done that showed USF and UCF had comparable fan bases:

 

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/

 

If USF was included, the Tampa Bay area would have more USF fans.  It's that simple.

[Guest]

 

Sorry, even zooming in as much as possible, I do not believe in USF's own zip code they have less than 6% support. Simply false, no further debate needed. 

 

Was there a breakdown by zip codes for Hillsborough County that I missed?

 

 

You have to zoom in, and you  can see the zipcode breakdown.

[charsibb]

 

For what it's worth... social media interaction is a fairly good representation of the broader audience.  Statistically speaking, there are enough Facebook members in every zip code to provide some level of predictability.

 

Although I am willing to bet USF was completely excluded from the overall study... there is no way USF is not in the top three teams in the zipcodes right around USF (33620, 33612, 33613, etc).

 

The New York Times should have looked at all 126 FBS teams... not just 82 of them.

Nobody was excluded from this ridiculous survey. They listed the top three teams that had "Likes" from either a zip code in some states or counties in others, like Florida. If you were #1 out of the 3 in any of those areas, zip code or county, you were considered part of the 82.

 

 

So what you're saying is that 33620 was intentionally or otherwise excluded from the list, not that USF was?

Edited October 3, 2014 by charsibb

[Triple B]

Sorry, even zooming in as much as possible, I do not believe in USF's own zip code they have less than 6% support. Simply false, no further debate needed.

 

Was there a breakdown by zip codes for Hillsborough County that I missed?

 

You have to zoom in, and you  can see the zipcode breakdown.

On phone but will check that later.

They checked on more than the 82 because some schools got top 3 in an area but aren't part of the 82. Why would they check for the Akron Zips and the Ohio Bobcats but not us?? That makes no sense. Guarantee all they did was pull the info from that one entry on FB, sort it by area codes and counties, and list the top 3 for whatever grouping they were using for that area, zip or county. Would be curious to know what drove which area they used for a certain part of country .... density?

[CPR]

AAC Facebook likes:

Cincinnati: 199,128
Memphis: 181,854
UConn: 179,504
UCF: 150,757
ECU: 83,271
Houston: 40,624
USF: 39,244
Tulsa: 31,203
SMU: 20,192
Temple: 6,369
Tulane: 4,064

[DELdaBull]

AAC Facebook likes:

Cincinnati: 199,128

Memphis: 181,854

UConn: 179,504

UCF: 150,757

ECU: 83,271

Houston: 40,624

USF: 39,244

Tulsa: 31,203

SMU: 20,192

Temple: 6,369

Tulane: 4,064

What's to like about USF football right now?

[Triple B]

 

 

For what it's worth... social media interaction is a fairly good representation of the broader audience.  Statistically speaking, there are enough Facebook members in every zip code to provide some level of predictability.

 

Although I am willing to bet USF was completely excluded from the overall study... there is no way USF is not in the top three teams in the zipcodes right around USF (33620, 33612, 33613, etc).

 

The New York Times should have looked at all 126 FBS teams... not just 82 of them.

Nobody was excluded from this ridiculous survey. They listed the top three teams that had "Likes" from either a zip code in some states or counties in others, like Florida. If you were #1 out of the 3 in any of those areas, zip code or county, you were considered part of the 82.

 

 

So what you're saying is that 33620 was intentionally or otherwise excluded from the list, not that USF was?

 

 

Finally figured it out .... I think .... It is based strictly on zip codes as far as the 84 (it's been adjusted up from 82, ECU gone UNC added among changes) are concerned. All you had to do was be the #1 school in ONE zip code to be included in the 84. The fact that the 33620 didn't even have us in the top 3 shows just how ridiculous this whole thing is .... further showing what a farce it is is what CPR posted. Cincy has almost 20k more of the dumb "Likes" than the second AAC school yet doesn't show up in the 84 .... Only thing this "survey" shows is that apparently our students aren't real serious Facebook users ... which isn't a bad thing.  

 

So the thread has nothing to do with media market and is still a Fail ....  

[Guest]

AAC Facebook likes:

Cincinnati: 199,128

Memphis: 181,854

UConn: 179,504

UCF: 150,757

ECU: 83,271

Houston: 40,624

USF: 39,244

Tulsa: 31,203

SMU: 20,192

Temple: 6,369

Tulane: 4,064

 

USF has 128,000 likes...

 

https://www.facebook.com/USouthFlorida

[Guest]

Finally figured it out .... I think .... It is based strictly on zip codes as far as the 84 (it's been adjusted up from 82, ECU gone UNC added among changes) are concerned. All you had to do was be the #1 school in ONE zip code to be included in the 84. The fact that the 33620 didn't even have us in the top 3 shows just how ridiculous this whole thing is .... further showing what a farce it is is what CPR posted. Cincy has almost 20k more of the dumb "Likes" than the second AAC school yet doesn't show up in the 84 .... Only thing this "survey" shows is that apparently our students aren't real serious Facebook users ... which isn't a bad thing.  

 

So the thread has nothing to do with media market and is still a Fail ....  

 

 

CPD is clearly wrong... for what it's worth.

 

I think the fact that Cincinnati - with the most likes in the AAC - doesn't show up even 2nd or 3rd in the zipcodes around the Queen City tells me they are not reporting the actual schools that are 2nd or 3rd in a zip code... they are looking at a list of schools and then seeing how those schools, and only those schools, fare.

 

Look around Kalamazoo... Western Michigan shows up - in 3rd place in many zip codes there.

 

And you're going to tell me that Cincy and USF somehow don't make the top 3 in any zip code?