One narrative is that the Big 12 media rights deal is going to blow away the PAC deal. Realistically, I think it'll be pretty close, with maybe a tiny edge to the Big 12 (which explains why PAC folks are arguing it'll be close and Big 12 folks are arguing it's a huge discrepancy)

The other narrative is that the PAC viewership is substantially higher than Big 12. Realistically, I think they're actually pretty close, with maybe a tiny edge to the PAC (which explains why Big 12 sites are arguing that the Big 12 is almost as strong and the PAC folks are arguing it's huge)

One other study I'd recommend is the one done by D1 360, who actually controlled for the averages and Standard Devs for every channel (though not for viewing window - according to both him and Altimore, that wasn't a really relevant factor [though I'm not sure I believe that])

https://twitter.com/TJAltimore/status/1549841853444505600

Again, Utah does pretty well in drawing eyes. I think (in this case), that TFL is probably right. Utah isn't going to drive ratings, but they're a good enough team to be a worthwhile foil to the teams who DO matter (from a TV perspective) and to help draw bigger ratings in those games that networks do care about. That's not a lot and Utah alone isn't worth it, but they can be a bit player on the stage of the big names.